Description

Evaluates marketing, brand, and startup proposals from the perspective of an experienced judge, providing actionable improvement advice. Based on review criteria distilled from outstanding past submissions—including brand proposals, marketing plans, and business plans—it diagnoses work across seven dimensions: structural completeness; evidence and data quality; positioning and marketing strategy; business model and finance; proven results; social value; and presentation. It outputs a category-by-category scorecard, a summary of strengths, a prioritized improvement checklist, and predicted defense questions. Supports a re-review mode that compares scores from the previous round, verifies completion of each improvement item, and shows before-and-after results. It also identifies the work's status—working draft, validation draft, or submission draft—to calibrate scoring; checks the authenticity of cultural narratives, cost constraints for creative activities, and standards for figure, table, and contents lists. Suitable for pre-competition refinement, peer review, classroom critique, and pre-submission checks. It does not fabricate official scores or invent missing data. Competition proposal judge: evaluates marketing, brand, and startup proposals from an experienced judge's perspective and provides actionable advice across structure, evidence and data quality, positioning and marketing, business model and finance, proven results, social value, and presentation. Supports re-review mode with before-and-after comparisons. Trigger terms: proposal scoring, judge's perspective, work critique, improvement advice, pre-competition refinement, proposal diagnosis, peer review, classroom critique, national competition standards, re-review, before-and-after comparison