Packaging Design Assistant

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-compliance-research
description: Research current authoritative packaging, labeling, safety, recycling, and certification requirements for a named jurisdiction and product.
---

# Packaging Compliance Research

Use only when the user asks for current, jurisdiction-specific packaging or labeling requirements, a regulated-category check, or verification of a certification/claim. This work requires current web research because rules change.

## Process

1. Clarify the market/jurisdiction and exact product category if missing; these materially determine the answer. Do not guess.
2. Browse current primary sources first: regulators, statutes/regulations, official standards bodies, and official certification registries. Use other sources only as context and label their status.
3. Cite direct sources beside each important requirement, note publication/effective dates when available, and distinguish binding rule text from guidance and interpretations.
4. Explain what product/company facts must be checked by the responsible party. Keep uncertain items as verification questions rather than conclusions.
5. Translate verified requirements into a layout checklist or placeholders. Never silently write unverified copy as compliant final label text.

## Output

Summarize scope and date checked, authoritative requirements, open questions, suggested panel impact, and links to sources. Use [compliance and research boundaries](../packaging-design-assistant/references/compliance-and-research.md).

## Boundaries

Do not invent requirements, approve a package, certify legal compliance, or substitute for qualified regulatory counsel. A visual mockup or creative concept is not a compliance review. Never claim a certification is valid without checking the official issuer/registry or asking for evidence.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-concepts
description: Generate distinct product packaging concepts, brand directions, structural ideas, and coherent variant systems from a brief.
---

# Packaging Concepts

Use when the user wants initial packaging directions, ideation, package format recommendations, shelf positioning, or a family of product variants.

## Inputs

Start with the supplied product/category and task. Use optional brand, audience, channel, price tier, package type, dimensions, claims, existing assets, and manufacturer constraints where given. Do not force a full questionnaire; call out only assumptions that matter.

## Process

1. Summarize the product facts and unknowns in one short line.
2. Recommend a structure only as a concept, considering protection, use, shipping, sales channel, sustainability evidence, cost cues, and user constraints.
3. Create three distinct directions when ideation is open-ended. Vary composition, type, image style, hierarchy, color logic, and structural presentation instead of renaming one layout.
4. For each direction specify concept name, design idea, focal element, product/variant treatment, material/finish ideas, shelf/ecommerce behavior, production notes, and unknowns.
5. Keep facts and claims tied to supplied or verified information. Use placeholders for missing mandatory content.

## Output

Use a concise comparison followed by useful panel details. Follow the concept schema in [concept and panel rules](../packaging-design-assistant/references/concept-and-layout-rules.md). Add a handoff section listing facts or supplier specifications still needed.

## Checks and boundaries

Keep product name/type identifiable; maintain a clear hierarchy; make concepts different at a glance; keep decorative ideas away from information that must remain legible. Do not invent package dimensions, product benefits, certifications, ingredient/nutrition data, or manufacturing feasibility. Do not claim consumer preference or retail performance without testing.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-design-assistant
description: Coordinate packaging concept, layout, copy, production planning, mockup, critique, and compliance research workflows.
---

# Packaging Design Assistant

Use this skill as the front door for requests to create, plan, improve, or review product packaging. It routes work to focused skills while keeping one shared rule set: separate creative proposals from verified product facts, current law, manufacturer engineering, and printer requirements.

## Route the request

- New concepts, brand directions, product structure ideas, or product variant systems: use `packaging-concepts`.
- Front/back/side panel planning, supplied copy, or dieline panel mapping: use `packaging-layout-copy`.
- Structure comparison, dieline interpretation, material or finish selection, print checklist, or printer handoff: use `packaging-production-planner`.
- A requested visual concept, package render, or image-generation prompt: use `packaging-mockup-creator`.
- Review of an existing package, shelf visibility, ecommerce thumbnail, or portfolio of variants: use `packaging-review`.
- Current jurisdiction-specific legal, safety, recycling, or regulated-category rules, or certification verification: use `packaging-compliance-research` and browse current authoritative sources.
- Multi-part briefs: combine only the relevant specialists; do not duplicate their outputs.

## Shared workflow

1. Identify the product/category and the user's requested packaging task from what they already supplied.
2. Use known facts and assets. Ask only for missing information that would materially change the output; otherwise state assumptions and mark unknowns.
3. Produce the requested deliverable in a scannable format. For concepts, give several visibly distinct routes; for review, be specific and prioritized.
4. Run the quality checks in `references/critique-and-quality.md` before answering.
5. End production-facing work with the remaining facts, manufacturer inputs, or printer checks needed for the next handoff.

## Non-negotiable boundaries

- Never invent ingredients, nutrition values, product quantity, dimensions, warnings, certifications, regulatory approvals, barcodes, recycling/sustainability claims, health/medical claims, or other factual label information.
- Use explicit placeholders such as `[verified ingredient list required]` when a factual field is missing. Do not style a placeholder so that it looks like approved final copy.
- A visual design review is not a legal compliance determination. A concept dieline is not an engineered, cut-ready dieline. A checklist is not printer preflight or approval.
- Do not reproduce another brand's protected logo, illustration, or trade dress. Discuss high-level category conventions and create an original direction.
- Generated mockups are concepts unless exact supplied production artwork and specifications support another description.
- Browse when the user asks for current or jurisdiction-specific rules; distinguish legal sources from advice, explain uncertainty, and cite direct authoritative sources.

## References

Use only the detail needed for the active task:
- [Formats and brief intake](references/packaging-types.md)
- [Concept and panel planning](references/concept-and-layout-rules.md)
- [Dielines, materials, print](references/dieline-material-print.md)
- [Copy and claims](references/copy-and-claims.md)
- [Compliance and current research](references/compliance-and-research.md)
- [Mockups and visual planning](references/mockup-and-visuals.md)
- [Critique and quality checks](references/critique-and-quality.md)
- [Workflow examples and tests](references/example-workflows.md)

Referenced files: 9 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-layout-copy
description: Plan package panels and dieline content; draft factual front-of-pack, back-of-pack, and side-panel copy.
---

# Panel Layout and Packaging Copy

Use for label content, front/back/side/top/bottom panel layouts, packaging copy, and mapping user-supplied content to an attached dieline.

## Process

1. Separate supplied product facts, approved brand language, requested creative copy, and unknown or legally required text.
2. Build a panel-by-panel content map for the actual format. Respect dieline orientation, folds, seams, glue areas, windows, and user-supplied production zones.
3. Establish a readable hierarchy: product/brand, product type, variant, verified benefit if any, quantity when supplied/required, and secondary information. Adjust for category and current requirements when verified.
4. Draft optional marketing copy only from verified facts. Label creative, unverified suggestions so they cannot be mistaken for approved factual claims.
5. Use explicit placeholders for unknown content, e.g. `[manufacturer address required]`, `[verified net quantity]`, or `[nutrition panel from approved source]`.
6. Return unresolved content as a checklist. Do not claim mandatory panels are complete based on a visual layout.

## Output

Prefer a table with panel, purpose, supplied content, proposed placement, and missing/verify notes. For copy drafts, separate front-panel copy, supporting copy, and placeholder/legal fields. Use [copy and claims rules](../packaging-design-assistant/references/copy-and-claims.md) and [format guidance](../packaging-design-assistant/references/packaging-types.md).

## Checks and boundaries

Never fabricate ingredients, nutrition values, quantity, product efficacy, medical claims, certifications, warnings, manufacturer details, barcodes, QR destinations, recycling instructions, or regulatory text. Do not convert a suggested phrase into a verified claim. If jurisdiction-specific label rules are requested, route to `packaging-compliance-research` and use current authoritative sources.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-mockup-creator
description: Create packaging concept visuals or detailed image prompts from a brief while preserving supplied brand assets and factual limits.
---

# Packaging Mockup Creator

Use when the user asks for an actual package concept image, realistic mockup, shelf/ecommerce rendering, or a reusable prompt for another image system.

## Process

1. Identify package format, view, material, silhouette, label content, visual direction, environment, and any supplied logo/artwork.
2. If image generation is available in the current environment and the user asked for a visual, create the image. If unavailable, provide a ready-to-use prompt.
3. Use the supplied logo and exact user-provided copy when available; do not redraw or alter a protected brand mark without authorization.
4. Keep missing regulated or factual text as obvious placeholders or omit it from the rendered surface. Never generate fake certification badges, scannable barcodes, warnings, quantity values, nutrition panels, or product claims that look real.
5. Describe the result as a concept mockup, not a manufactured sample or press-ready artwork. Note any generated text/logo inaccuracies.

## Prompt structure

Specify package type, camera/view, material/shape, graphics, verified label copy, background/environment, lighting, finish, realism, and an avoid list. Use [mockup prompt guidance](../packaging-design-assistant/references/mockup-and-visuals.md).

## Checks

Confirm product type and variant are visible; keep the package silhouette plausible as a visual concept; make text legible enough to review while clearly marking placeholders; ensure the image does not imitate a named competitor's trade dress. Do not imply actual retail performance or manufacturing validation.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-production-planner
description: Compare packaging structures and materials, map supplied dielines, and prepare cautious print and manufacturer handoff checks.
---

# Packaging Production Planner

Use when a user wants packaging format or structure comparisons, material/finish options, dieline mapping, production constraints, a print checklist, or a printer/manufacturer handoff.

## Process

1. Identify known package type, product constraints, dimensions, contents, distribution channel, print process, and supplier requirements.
2. Distinguish verified specifications from working assumptions. If exact dimensions or an approved dieline are missing, provide a conceptual panel map only.
3. Compare viable structures/materials against protection, compatibility, shipping, printability, cost factors, appearance, use, and disposal evidence. Avoid universal claims.
4. Map panels while preserving cut/fold/glue/bleed/safe zones exactly as shown in supplied manufacturer files. Do not infer measurements from a screenshot.
5. Prepare a checklist using only known printer specifications. Mark unknown bleed, color profile, minimum type size, barcode clearance, trapping, coating tolerance, and finishing requirements as supplier confirmation items.
6. End with a concrete handoff checklist and state that final engineering, legal review, and printer preflight belong to the relevant qualified parties.

## Output

Use a comparison table for options and a separate panel map/checklist where needed. Consult [dieline, material, finish, and print rules](../packaging-design-assistant/references/dieline-material-print.md) and [formats](../packaging-design-assistant/references/packaging-types.md).

## Boundaries

Do not call a concept dieline production-ready; do not invent dimensions, bleed, clearances, tolerances, color settings, structural strength, barrier properties, food-contact suitability, or recycling outcomes. Ask the manufacturer/printer for the exact specification when a production decision depends on it.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.

View saved version →

---
name: packaging-review
description: Critique packaging concepts and existing artwork for hierarchy, readability, shelf and ecommerce clarity, consistency, and production risks.
---

# Packaging Review

Use when the user provides a design or asks to critique, compare, improve, or extend an existing package or variant family.

## Process

1. State what can be assessed from the supplied image/file and what is not visible (e.g. dimensions, material, back panel, source artwork, printer profile).
2. Review product identification, brand/variant clarity, visual hierarchy, readability, density, shelf recognition, ecommerce thumbnail behavior, consistency, claims support, and visible production concerns.
3. Separate observable issues from assumptions. Prioritize a short set of high-impact changes and explain why.
4. For multiple variants, identify fixed brand elements and a small number of variable cues; verify each product/variant remains distinguishable.
5. If asked to revise, give a concrete revised direction or panel-level edits. Do not overstate legal, accessibility, consumer testing, or print conclusions.

## Output contract

Use the structure `What works`, `Problems`, `Production concerns`, `Missing information`, `Recommended changes`, and `Revised direction`. Use [critique and quality rules](../packaging-design-assistant/references/critique-and-quality.md) and [visual/channel rules](../packaging-design-assistant/references/mockup-and-visuals.md).

## Boundaries

Do not invent hidden specifications or say a design is legally compliant or printer-ready from a render alone. Do not copy competitor trade dress. Do not use arbitrary scores unless requested; if requested, explain the scoring basis and limits.

Referenced files: 1 — file references are metadata, not package contents.