Claude Fable 5.2 Creative Feedback: Turn Conflicting Comments into a Revision List

Quick answer

Group comments by affected element, distinguish a requested change from an unresolved conflict, and ask the approver to settle the conflict. Send one accepted change to Ciyo with an explicit list of what must stay unchanged.

1. Collect comments with enough context

For a fictional florist campaign, assign IDs to the approved image and each reviewer’s comment. Include the reviewer’s role, affected element and date. Do not strip out a reason such as the white headline is hard to read on the bouquet.

Separate facts from preferences. A misspelled business name is a correction; a warmer background is a preference. A comment about the offer needs the offer owner, even if a designer could edit the words quickly.

2. Build a decision log before editing

Ask Fable to group duplicate comments and preserve contradictory ones. The output should include proposed action, evidence, decision owner and status. A newer preference does not automatically override a prior approval from another authority.

For the brighter-versus-darker conflict, ask what problem each person is solving. If the issue is headline readability, a small text treatment may address it without changing the entire photographic mood. That is a proposed resolution for approval, not a model’s authority to decide.

3. Make one scoped revision and compare it

In Ciyo, identify the accepted source picture and request only the approved change. State the unchanged product, arrangement, copy and crop. Compare the result against the source rather than relying on memory.

Record the new version and the comment IDs it resolves. If the edit alters the bouquet or introduces new text, reject it or return to the accepted version. Keep unresolved comments visible so a tidy revision list does not become a false sign-off.

Copy and adapt this request

Replace the bracketed fields with your own approved information. The requested output is a draft for review; the example has not been run as a model benchmark.

Consolidate [COMMENTS WITH IDS] about [ASSET VERSION]. Group duplicates, retain contradictions and distinguish factual corrections from preferences. Return affected element, proposed action, source comment IDs, approver and status. Do not resolve authority conflicts yourself. Draft one scoped revision request containing only approved changes and an explicit unchanged list.

Illustrative feedback log

These example checks describe acceptance criteria, not observed model results.

Common mistakes and how to recover

Do not treat a friendly acknowledgment as approval. Record the actual decision and the version it applies to.

Avoid a general request to improve the image when the approved task is one correction. It makes unintended changes harder to identify.

Choose a working method and make the handoff

For a solo shop, start with one item and keep the source facts beside the draft. A team should name one approver and keep a dated version so an old comment cannot silently override the current decision. If the input is incomplete, return to the owner of that fact before polishing the artwork.

Use Ciyo for the visual work described here with the controls and models currently offered in your account. Keep the approved copy separately and add exact wording with editable canvas text where needed. A generated picture is a visual draft; inspect its exported file before using it.

• Ciyo infinite canvas
• AI design agent

Sources and further reading

Primary documentation and related guides used for this article. Availability and controls can vary by account; verify them before beginning your own run.

• Anthropic model overview