Generate a concept set
Explore distinct creative directions under a clear brief.
Complete prompt
Task
Explore distinct creative directions under a clear brief.
Instructions
Develop [NUMBER] distinct concepts for [PROJECT] aimed at [AUDIENCE]. Constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]. For each, give premise, emotional effect, visual or structural device, risk, and a small first test. Avoid near duplicates and avoid claiming that an untested concept will perform.
Expected output
Concept cards followed by a recommendation for the next test.
Checks
- Concepts differ in mechanism.
- Constraints are honored.
- Performance claims are hypotheses.Expected output and checks
Expected output
Concept cards followed by a recommendation for the next test.
Checks
- Concepts differ in mechanism.
- Constraints are honored.
- Performance claims are hypotheses.
Worked example
Generate a concept set: recorded example
Original input
Task
Explore distinct creative directions under a clear brief.
Instructions
Develop 3 distinct concepts for fictional Paper Lantern volunteer recruitment workshop aimed at local adults who can volunteer two hours. Constraints: Only owned text, simple original shapes and a free community noticeboard; no paid stock, ads or fabricated testimonials. Capacity24, date19September2026. Each idea must use a different participation mechanism.. For each, give premise, emotional effect, visual or structural device, risk, and a small first test. Avoid near duplicates and avoid claiming that an untested concept will perform.
Expected output
Concept cards followed by a recommendation for the next test.
Checks
- Concepts differ in mechanism.
- Constraints are honored.
- Performance claims are hypotheses.
What the checks found
- Three mechanisms differ: choose a role, leave a question, pass a detachable invitation. Each has a premise, device, risk and small comprehension test.
- Date/capacity and free noticeboard/original-art constraints are retained. Roles and reaction effects are identified as proposals or hypotheses.
Revisions after the first output
- No factual correction; these concepts have not been audience-tested.
Original output
All three concepts use original text, simple original shapes, and a free community noticeboard. Each announces the fictional Paper Lantern workshop on 19 September 2026, with capacity 24, for local adults who can volunteer two hours. A real contact or registration route must be supplied before posting; no invented sign-ups or testimonials are used.
1. Choose Your Two Hours
Premise: Make the invitation a choice between useful contributions. Three plain boxes ask: “Would you rather help set up, welcome people, or share materials?” These are proposed roles to confirm with the organizer.
Participation mechanism: A prospective volunteer selects a role when expressing interest through the organizer's confirmed registration route. Preference does not guarantee assignment.
Emotional effect: A hypothesis: a concrete choice may help someone picture themselves contributing.
Visual device: Three original outline shapes—a rectangle, circle, and triangle—label the options without relying on color. Footer: “Paper Lantern · 19 September 2026 · Two hours · 24 places.”
Risk: People may mistake role selection for a reserved place, or avoid an option that sounds demanding. State that places require confirmation.
Small first test: Show a paper mock-up to five local adults. Ask which role they would choose and what choosing it means. Note whether they understand that registration is still required.
2. Make Room for a Question
Premise: Lead with “Never volunteered before? What would you like to know?” Give first-timers a way to shape the information they receive.
Participation mechanism: With noticeboard permission, place a small paper question pocket beneath the announcement. Adults can leave an anonymous question; the organizer posts a short factual answer on the same board. Leaving a question is not registration.
Emotional effect: A hypothesis: seeing ordinary questions welcomed may reduce uncertainty without promising confidence or transformation.
Structural device: An original speech-bubble outline surrounds the invitation; a separate date/capacity strip keeps the essentials visible. Use only real submitted questions, or clearly label organizer-written prompts as examples.
Risk: Questions may go unanswered or include personal information. Ask for no names/contact details and commit to a feasible checking schedule before using the pocket.
Small first test: Let five adults inspect the mock-up. Ask them to write one question and explain how they would register. Test whether the question pocket distracts from the actual invitation.
3. Pass the Invitation
Premise: Give people a small, useful invitation they can hand to someone who might enjoy a two-hour contribution.
Participation mechanism: A noticeboard poster has detachable text strips: “A couple of useful hours? Paper Lantern, 19 September 2026.” Each includes the confirmed registration route, the two-hour commitment, and “24 places; registration required.” Each person registers separately.
Emotional effect: A hypothesis: a personal handoff could make the invitation feel approachable.
Visual device: Two original outlined squares linked by a line suggest passing a note. No stock images or endorsements.
Risk: Taking strips is not evidence of registrations, and the framing could imply that attendance requires a companion. Add “Come on your own or pass this along.” Obtain permission for detachable strips.
Small first test: Ask five adults to read one detached strip without seeing the poster. Check recall of date, commitment, capacity, and next step. Ask whether they think they must bring someone.
Recommended next test
Start with Choose Your Two Hours, after confirming the roles and registration route. It has the simplest preparation and lets the organizer test a specific uncertainty: can a first-time volunteer picture a useful contribution? Use the five-person comprehension test before posting. Treat expressed preference as qualitative feedback, not a prediction of recruitment performance.