Working Design skill
Manage creative feedback
Consolidate creative feedback into evidence, decisions, priorities, and owned revisions.
Route comments through the brief and decision owner. The creator should receive one coherent revision set, not a pile of competing instructions.
Procedure
- Confirm the current version, brief, audience, success criteria, reviewer roles, decision owner, and revision allowance.
- Collect feedback in one system with author, date, artifact location, comment, and proposed outcome.
- Separate objective defects, requirement misses, audience hypotheses, legal or accessibility issues, preferences, and new scope.
- Ask for the underlying problem when a comment prescribes a solution.
- Group duplicates and identify contradictions, dependencies, and comments based on stale versions.
- Evaluate comments against audience evidence, brief, constraints, rights, and production cost.
- Have the authorized owner decide accept, adapt, test, defer, reject, or re-scope, with rationale.
- Produce one prioritized revision list with acceptance criteria, owner, and deadline.
- Verify the next version against accepted decisions and keep a change log across rounds.
Failure plan
- Do not resolve conflict by counting comments or favoring seniority without decision authority.
- Never expose private reviewer notes or attribute criticism unnecessarily.
- If feedback introduces material new scope, re-estimate and approve it before revision.
- Treat safety, rights, accessibility, and factual errors as gates, not visual preferences.
--- name: manage-creative-feedback category: design description: Consolidate creative feedback into evidence, decisions, priorities, and owned revisions. Use when reviewers disagree, comments conflict, or revision rounds are losing direction. --- # manage-creative-feedback Route comments through the brief and decision owner. The creator should receive one coherent revision set, not a pile of competing instructions. ## Procedure 1. Confirm the current version, brief, audience, success criteria, reviewer roles, decision owner, and revision allowance. 2. Collect feedback in one system with author, date, artifact location, comment, and proposed outcome. 3. Separate objective defects, requirement misses, audience hypotheses, legal or accessibility issues, preferences, and new scope. 4. Ask for the underlying problem when a comment prescribes a solution. 5. Group duplicates and identify contradictions, dependencies, and comments based on stale versions. 6. Evaluate comments against audience evidence, brief, constraints, rights, and production cost. 7. Have the authorized owner decide accept, adapt, test, defer, reject, or re-scope, with rationale. 8. Produce one prioritized revision list with acceptance criteria, owner, and deadline. 9. Verify the next version against accepted decisions and keep a change log across rounds. ## Failure plan - Do not resolve conflict by counting comments or favoring seniority without decision authority. - Never expose private reviewer notes or attribute criticism unnecessarily. - If feedback introduces material new scope, re-estimate and approve it before revision. - Treat safety, rights, accessibility, and factual errors as gates, not visual preferences. ## Done - Every material comment has a recorded disposition and rationale - The revision list is conflict-free, prioritized, and approved - The delivered version is checked against accepted changes and unresolved scope is visible