Shreyp087 Idea Tournament
Choose an ambitious concept whose strongest claim can be built and demonstrated within the event. Preserve a product or domain the user has already chosen; use the tournament to explore mechanisms or scope within that choice.
Workflow
- Gather the event rubric, hard gates, available time, team capabilities, existing assets and available APIs/hardware. Treat unknown constraints explicitly.
- Generate a diverse candidate set. Vary the user, painful moment, mechanism, modality, collaboration pattern and output artifact; avoid cosmetic variations of one chatbot.
- Reduce to a few meaningfully different finalists. For each, write a one-sentence user promise, core interaction, visible result, required integration and biggest technical uncertainty.
- When differentiation could change the choice and external research is allowed, briefly check the closest alternatives using primary product docs or creator repositories. Date the findings. Otherwise keep novelty unverified and use the time for the decisive feasibility test. Novelty means a specific difference from identified alternatives, not proof nobody has done it.
- Give each finalist its strongest objection. Identify a short experiment that could reject the concept before substantial UI or infrastructure work.
- Compare event fit, evidence of need, demonstrable novelty, feasibility, dependency risk and clarity. Apply official rubric weights only where appropriate; keep eligibility gates separate.
- Pick a candidate and runner-up with reasons and reversal conditions. Scope the first end-to-end flow, the earliest risk spike, and features to cut first.
Useful candidate mutations
- Change the scarce resource: attention, connectivity, time, dexterity, budget or expertise.
- Replace a generic conversation with a useful artifact or observable action.
- Combine one unfamiliar capability with a familiar user workflow.
- Make uncertainty inspectable or recovery a useful product behavior.
- Turn a long or hardware-dependent process into a clearly labeled replayable artifact.
Use a mutation only if it helps the user or makes a relevant technical capability demonstrable.
Outputs
Write artifacts/idea-tournament.md or update the existing decision document:
- Candidate comparison with facts, estimates and assumptions distinguished.
- Selected idea and runner-up, including the strongest case against each.
- The proposed 15-second “what happens” moment and permitted full demo outline.
- A timeboxed feasibility experiment with pass/fail evidence and a fallback.
- One core workflow, scope cuts and the condition that would change the decision.
Failure constraints
- Scores support a discussion; they are not measured probabilities of winning.
- Do not invent interviews, market validation, benchmarks, endorsements or novelty.
- Consider licensing, prior-work rules and required disclosures before proposing reuse.
- More agents, dependencies or features are not evidence of technical merit by themselves.
- Prefer a decisive test over another round of speculative rankings when uncertainty dominates.
- Do not expand the build beyond the user's authorized scope or contact users without authorization.