design-evaluation

# Design Evaluation ## Purpose Evaluate design quality consistently without pretending that a score is an award outcome. Keep design quality, presentation quality, and evidence confidence separate. Require the user to choose the maturity track. ## Scope Boundary - Evaluate the supplied design and supplied presentation materials. - Classify one primary discipline, one primary sector, and optional secondary labels and focus tags. - Build an evidence ledger before scoring. - Score the general rubric and report Critical findings separately. - Apply an optional award-aligned lens only when the user already names a target award. - Batch-evaluate a fixed corpus only after the user approves the maturity mapping for every included record. - Produce score-based shortlists within each maturity track; never cross-rank Student Concept and Mature Work. Do not: - infer or change the work maturity; - retrieve award winners inside this skill; - recommend which award to enter; - turn findings into a full redesign proposal; - audit upload limits, filenames, declarations, licences, or portal compliance; - call the result an official iF, Red Dot, or other jury decision; - estimate an exact probability of winning. - label a rank percentile, top-decile membership, or score as a winning probability. Route winner retrieval to `$design-award-search`, award selection to `$design-award-match`, concrete redesign work to `$design-optimization` when available, and final package compliance to `$desig...