design-award-pipeline
Route and coordinate an end-to-end design-award workflow across winner research, evidence-based evaluation, award matching, entry-text preparation, and final submission checking. Use when a user asks for a complete award plan, does not know which Design Judge skill to use, wants multiple stages coordinated, or needs a resumable workflow with explicit handoffs. Do not replace the specialist skills, invent project facts, treat scores as winning probabilities, or bypass current official-rule verification.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SeanJ1ang/design-judge-skills /tmp/design-award-pipeline && cp -r /tmp/design-award-pipeline/skills/design-award-pipeline ~/.claude/skills/design-award-pipelineSKILL.md
# Design Award Pipeline Coordinate the specialist Design Judge skills without duplicating their rules. ## Route the request Choose the smallest sufficient route: | User goal | Route | |---|---| | Find comparable winners | `design-award-search` | | Diagnose or score the design | `design-evaluation` | | Select an award, route, or category | `design-award-match` | | Prepare entry fields and copy | `design-information-prep` | | Audit a concrete submission package | `design-submission-check` | | Complete journey | evaluation or match → information prep → submission check; add search only when precedents are needed | If the user has not provided enough information to select a route, ask at most one short question. Otherwise proceed with explicit assumptions. ## Maintain the handoff Create or update a compact handoff record using [references/handoff-schema.json](references/handoff-schema.json). Keep these concepts separate: - user-supplied facts; - evidence-backed findings; - model inferences; - missing facts and live-rule checks; - decisions already approved by the user; - the next recommended specialist skill. Do not copy long specialist outputs into the handoff. Store identifiers, decisions, blockers, source links, and artifact paths. When a handoff is written to JSON, run `python scripts/validate_handoff.py <handoff.json>` before treating it as resumable. Use [examples/handoff.example.json](examples/handoff.example.json) as a minimal valid shape, not as project evidence. ## Coordinate stages 1. State the selected route and why it is sufficient. 2. Invoke or follow the relevant specialist Skill exactly. 3. Preserve its uncertainty labels, evidence confidence, and blockers. 4. Stop for user approval when the target award, maturity track, or another consequential choice changes downstream work. 5. Hand off only facts supported by user material or cited official sources. 6. End with the completed stage, unresolved blockers, and the next optional stage. ## Boundaries - Never merge fit score, design score, and evidence confidence into one number. - Never claim or estimate a probability of winning. - Never treat observed winners as official jury weights. - Never mark a package ready when time-sensitive official rules remain unverified. - Never invoke all specialist skills when one is enough.
Match a design project to supported design-award programs, tracks, and entry categories; apply structural eligibility gates; verify current official rules; compare published criteria and cautiously described winner trends; and output fit, evidence confidence, and submission priority. Use when a user asks which award or category to enter, compares awards, or requests an award-fit analysis. Supports iF, iF Student, Red Dot Product, Red Dot Design Concept, IDEA, DIA, K-Design, GOOD DESIGN AWARD Japan, Core77, James Dyson, and EPDA. Do not use for winner retrieval alone, detailed submission-file compliance, general design evaluation, optimization, or winning-probability prediction.
Find and verify award-winning designs in the same or adjacent functional category through eight explicit relevance dimensions: problem and user, core function, sensing technology, intervention mechanism, physical form, use context and workflow, system architecture, and visual language. Use when a user asks for same-category winners, comparable precedents, design benchmarks, appearance-related award winners, or examples from iF Design, Red Dot, IDEA, or iF Design Student Award. Do not use this skill to score, judge, optimize, or match the user's design to an award.
Evaluate one design or a user-approved maturity-mapped batch through a transparent evidence-based rubric. Classify each work, score design quality and presentation, identify Critical risks, report evidence confidence, and optionally shortlist works within separate maturity tracks. Use when a user asks to judge, score, critique, review, diagnose, batch-evaluate, or rank designs by evidence-aligned evaluation score. Do not use this skill to retrieve winners, choose an award, produce a redesign, audit submission-file compliance, simulate an official jury, or predict winning probability.
Extract evidence-grounded project facts from user-provided design attachments, identify missing information, and prepare the exact written fields required by supported design-award entry forms. Use when a user asks to prepare, draft, adapt, translate, or validate application text for iF, iF Student, Red Dot Product Design, IDEA, DIA, K-Design, GOOD DESIGN AWARD Japan, Core77, James Dyson, or EPDA. Also use to build a reusable project dossier from briefs, decks, reports, manuals, patents, research, images, or prior application materials. Do not use for award selection alone, winner retrieval, design-quality scoring, final file-format auditing, or winning-probability prediction.
Shared support package for the Design Judge skill collection. Install it with design-award-search and design-award-match so those skills can read the canonical functional-design taxonomy and official award-source registry. Do not invoke it as a standalone design workflow.
Audit a design-award submission package against the current official rules for a specific award cycle. Check required materials and technical constraints, cross-material facts and claims, rights and disclosure risks, and final submission readiness. Use when a user asks for a pre-submission check, compliance review, missing-material audit, consistency check, or final go/no-go decision. Do not use this skill to choose an award, retrieve winners, judge the design itself, rewrite the whole entry, or give a legal clearance opinion.