make-static-ads-render-review

• SKILL.mdcore · 6,583 bytes
• skill.meta.jsonasset · 531 bytes

# render-review

Shared principles for reviewing generated media (looking vs reading metadata, unseen images): the `honest-review` skill (`../honest-review/SKILL.md`). Checks and their severities: `../make-static-ads/references/review-rubric.md`. This file is the one home of the retry rule.

**Reads:** each render (`gooseworks:ads_creative_read` `creative_id`, `include: ["renders"]`), its board row (level, style and template), its exact prompt and copy, `profile.md` with two of the brand's own ads, the official product photos or UI screenshots, and the logo.
**Writes:** per render the verdict and the failed checks; retries; the drop list; tags; all of it in the batch file.

0. **Failed or empty render.** Say so in one line. Read the job (`gooseworks:job_get`): charged, or no charge shown → it counts as this ad and ratio's first try; its one retry (step 5) is still covered; clearly uncharged → submit the same quoted request once more, outside the retry. If that fails too, stop for that ad and ratio and tell the marketer.
1. **Place the logo on every try** (unless the marketer said none; then, as with no shell, the raw render is the kept version): on a shell host run `../make-static-ads/scripts/place_logo.py` with the real logo file (corner and width as the prompt left clear), upload the result with `gooseworks:media_upload` (`scope: "brand"`, `kind: "image"`, `source: {type: "bytes"}`, base64, under 8 MB), and `gooseworks:ads_save` it with the raw render's creative as `parent_creative_id`. This logo version is what the judge sees, what gets the tags, and what the marketer receives; tag the raw render `superseded`. Record the box the script prints. No shell: the marketer's choice (playbook Step 2, or graphic-request step 3): a clear corner they fill, or the model's logo; the raw render is then the kept version.
2. **The judge.** A fresh subagent gets only: the kept version (step 1), the product photos or screenshots and logo, the exact on-image copy, the board row's visual idea, style, protected choice, level, and the template's image with its description, `profile.md` with two of the brand's own ads, and the rubric. Not the conversation. It runs every rubric check except 1, 7, 12, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 29, and returns each failed check's number and severity with one sentence each. It works in the rubric's Order. For software, the screen must match the real screenshot in layout, colours and its large labels; soft small UI text is a NOTE, never a retry. No subagents → you judge from exactly those inputs, and the batch file says so.
3. **Your checks**, on every try: 1 by Pass B of the `make-static-ads-claims-extract` skill (`../make-static-ads-claims-extract/SKILL.md`: invented badges, stars, prices, changed words); 7 by the price rule (`../make-static-ads/references/claims-and-policy.md` §2); 21 against the copy (12 and 17 ran at the copy step; re-run them only on changed copy); 20 against the permissions on file; 29 against the made-before list; for a direct competitor's template, 22's side-by-side with both logos covered.
4. **Verdict**, in this order:
   - Label drift only (scene, shape and pose pass): the free repair first. A shell host may patch the official label's real pixels in with `../make-static-ads/scripts/repair_patch.py` (`../make-static-ads/scripts/repair_patch.md`), then judge the patched image again in full; keep the original render. A seam, altered geometry or wrong product still fails.
   - A stray mark or small artifact outside the protected choice and the words: a free pixel fix on a shell host, then judged again in full.