Start with a certified template. Review layout changes in the conversation.
Design Center
QA Review
Generate & refine
Approved templates
PPT Studio prototype · template selection, generation and QA review.
I lead product and UX for tools that help CNGS marketers produce seller communications. MUSE is live for email. The broader Design MCP platform is in validation.
Role
Product & UX lead
Period
2024–Present
Surface
Internal web platform
Scale
Org-wide · CNGS
Status
Mixed · MUSE live, platform in validation
130certified PPT layout modules
4product workflows on one platform
3 daysmanual exhibition deck placement today
Routine production filled the design queue
A small central design team handled recurring production for Amazon Global Selling China. Even approved campaign copy needed layout and coding work before it could be sent.
I looked at which production decisions could be specified in templates and which still needed a person to review them.
Sharing the design rules across products
The platform design uses a Model Context Protocol server to expose template and rendering tools to compatible AI clients.
The planned shared services cover PPT Studio, MUSE email, Adaptive Creative and the Image Library. Brand rules and QA checks are maintained centrally.
I separated the integration approach from the instructions that tell an agent how to use it:
APIProduct integration
An API can provide the shared rendering service. Each product still needs a way to expose those operations to its AI client.
SkillAgent instructions
A skill describes the workflow and when to call a tool. Its instructions need versioning as the workflow changes.
MCPShared callable tools
MCP gives compatible clients a common way to call the design tools. The server manages template versions and rendering checks.
I own product definition and UX, including the template system and validation rules. I work with engineering and business teams on how those rules are applied.
Deciding when human review is needed
The platform specifies review points for content accuracy, image approval and final delivery. Layout checks can flag a problem and return it to the appropriate owner.
I define those checks with the template rules. The pilot tests them against actual conference materials.
System architecture
The proposed platform shares design rules across four production workflows.
Approved Chinese sessions need template application. Global English keynotes need format conversion and image sourcing, with translation handled by the content owner.
Exhibition content arrives in a spreadsheet. Placing it into a 100-page deck currently takes one person about three days.
PPT Studio uses an approved template and 130 certified layout modules. When copy exceeds a layout’s limits, it offers another layout or returns the copy to its owner for editing.
Validation includes structural collision checks and visual review at 200% zoom. The module is being tested with real materials.
PPT Studio · product user journey
User actionAI / tool actionHuman quality control / choice ⏸Automated quality control
Step 1 · Content side
Prepare materials
CommSphere · Pitch Deck Gen · Maven
Collect semi-finished decksDaily decks · Accelerate EN versions · outline copy · any of the three content tools
State the requirementBreakout first / Main Session limited · page count · output ratio
QC④ Human final review ⏸Content owner and designer approve delivery
Agency shifts to local fixesThe pilot measures changes in agency workload
Deliver to SCUsage tracking · feedback loop
Four review gates and a choice between two layout treatments.
Main path · PPT Studio · pilot Oct 2026
A seven-step walkthrough of the PPT prototype
User · click / decideAI · design workGate · governance
1Choose template
2To conversation
3Content gate
4Pick module
5Render → QA
6Two decisions
Editable PPTX
1
User
Open Design Center, click Choose template
Choose the certified Dark 2026 template at the top of the hub. The other entries show planned workflows.
The template library opens with Dark 2026 ready to inspect.
Click
library opens · Dark 2026 ready
2
User
Preview the modules, click Continue to conversation
One certified visual system in the pilot: 130 editable modules, 19 layout types. The previews show what Dark 2026 contains before you commit.
A workspace conversation opens with the template locked in.
Click
workspace opens · template locked in
3
UserGate
Drop in your content file · the gate reads it first
draft-content.docx has no approval record, so it is held with a plain answer. Nothing renders from an unapproved draft.
Upload approved-content.docx and say what you need · the flow continues from the approved file only.
Chat · zoom
Held
Upload
approved file only · draft stays held
4
AIUser
Pick a module in the chat
Design MCP reads the 12 approved sections and recommends three fits for the opening. Click Open Pillars · T07 to confirm.
The editable deck starts building · 8 of 14 slides and counting.
Chat · zoom
Click
module confirmed · deck building 8/14
5
AIUser
Watch the render, then click Send to QA
The Design Files panel shows each slide’s render status. QA becomes available when all slides finish rendering.
Click Send to QA to run the checks in the same thread.
Design files · zoom
Then click
14/14 rendered · QA runs in-thread
6
GateUser
Answer the two decisions on slide 7
QA flags slide 7 in the 14-slide deck. Click Apply fix for the logo safe area. For copy over the limit, choose Switch layout or return it to the content owner.
The specified type minimum stays in place while the layout or copy is revised.
QA · zoom
Click
Or this
2 fixes cleared · ready for human review
Outcome · step 7
Open in PowerPoint → editable PPTX
Open the exported file in PowerPoint to edit its objects. Speaker notes and the template’s brand settings are retained.
Product 2
MUSE
Marketing User Interface & Style Engine generates email layouts and HTML from approved campaign copy.
An email took 6–8 hours to build
The channel team serves 800K sellers with roughly 600 emails a year. Each email took a designer or agency 6–8 hours to lay out and code.
A specialist then completed about 80 setup steps in Pardot before sending.
With MUSE, a marketer uploads approved copy in Word and gets email HTML in 30–60 seconds. A person reviews the creative before ECHO handles the Pardot setup in two clicks.
The rules behind the generated HTML
MUSE applies 94 coding rules and 40 brand guidelines. These cover client compatibility, layout and input checks across its module library.
MUSE + ECHO · EMAIL PRODUCTION JOURNEY
User actionTool actionHuman review / choiceAutomated check
Step 1
Prepare content
Approved Word documentThe marketer provides approved campaign copy.
Step 2
Generate with MUSE
Production HTML + QA report68 design modules · 3 templates · 94 coding rules · 40 brand guidelines.
Step 3
Approve creative
Human approvalReview the creative before deployment.
Step 4
Deploy with ECHO
Set up in PardotRPA operator · ~80 steps → 2 clicks.
Step 5
Send
Email delivered12.5 h manual → ~20 min.
Validation issue → return HTML or dynamic-field fixes to MUSE.
94 coding rules · on 68 modules / 3 templates
36Client compatibility · international & Chinese mail clients
16Responsive & performance
18Content generation rules
24Quality control & input validation
40 brand guidelines
13Colours & logo
9Typography
10Spacing & layout
8CTA hierarchy
Results in use
MUSE has been used for seller campaigns since May 2026. It was announced to CNGS Marketing in August.
6–8 h → ~1 minCreative + HTML, per email
4 days → 1.5 daysContent-to-send lead time
~7,300 hEstimated annual hours saved, MUSE + ECHO
¥200K → ¥0Annual agency fee, recurring
98 sends · 0 failuresReported sends since May 2026
Self-serve HTMLMarketers generate layouts from approved copy
Marketers can prepare HTML through MUSE. Creative approval remains a human step before deployment.
The input and delivered emails
The Word input and generated email below show how MUSE applies its module library to campaign copy.
Open the campaign examples to inspect the complete HTML output, including the legal footer.
SYSTEM EVIDENCE · COMPLETE CAMPAIGN EMAILS · ORIGINAL CHINESE CONTENT
Captured from the supplied HTML files, including every section and footer. Template variables are shown as supplied. The newsletter’s recipient-specific QR image requires send-time data.
MUSE 2 · Hyper-personalization
MUSE 2 generates one email per seller from AI-written content. Live since September 2026, it runs every business day for MAVEN, the seller-launch personalization program.
The content now came from an agent
MUSE 1 received Word documents with headings and formatting. In MUSE 2, the content agent writes each seller’s email into a plain-text spreadsheet cell.
I needed a way for the content agent to specify email modules in that cell. The same format had to work across thousands of rows.
Seven tags identify the email modules
I defined seven tags: title, preview, salutation, body, sub-heading, list and button. Two inline markers specify emphasis.
I packaged these rules as a skill for the content agent. It writes seller-specific copy with tags that map to MUSE’s design modules.
A deterministic parser renders each row with the same layout rules. No model runs at send time.
LIVE · HYPER INTERFACE2,189HTML outputs · one workbook batch
BUILT-IN QUALITY CONTROL
Inspect the selected email’s QC result.
The green status opens the checks behind the selected email’s QC result.
010203
01 · Batch navigator
Viewing output 1 of 2,189
03 · Green QC statusPassed for the selected email
02 · QC panel, enlarged
69 text groups19 number groups4 percentage groups2 URL groups
Also checks dates, email addresses, amounts and dynamic placeholders.
LIVE HYPER INTERFACE · 2,189 HTML outputs in one batch. Green QC shows the selected email has passed its checks.
SOURCE WORKBOOK
One content cell → one email.
Workbook overview · column G highlighted
contentColumn G · detail
The source file carries each email’s tagged structure in the content column. Original Chinese copy is preserved.CONTENT CONTRACT · TYPESET FROM THE AUGUST 2026 SPECIFICATION
Quality control
We built an independent QC step into the live pipeline. It checks that every rendered email faithfully preserves its source content before it can be sent.
HYPER · QUALITY CONTROL JOURNEY
User actionTool actionHuman review / choiceAutomated check
Step 1
Source content
Provide the sourceOne tagged content cell per email.
Step 2
Generate HTML
Assemble the emailUse the shared template and source content.
Step 3
Check fidelity
Compare against sourceComplete · accurate · correctly structured.
Step 4
Resolve the result
Pass → ready to sendGreen QC status appears in the interface.
Fail → retry and recheckUp to 3 retries.
Still failing → human reviewReview the reason and decide the next action.
QC checks fidelity. The content owner remains responsible for source accuracy and compliance.
Results in use
MUSE 2 supplies the HTML generation step for MAVEN’s daily emails. It renders each seller’s content and checks the output against the source.
+55% capacity+22 sends a month on the 40 quota, zero added designer hours
Exception reviewQC flags failed checks for retry and human review
Shared rendering rulesEvery row uses the same parser and layout rules
Program result · MAVEN pilot, first month
3.2×click rate vs lifecycle baseline (11.4% vs 3.6%) across 2,558 prospects reached
Program-wide figure for the personalization program across WeChat, WeCom and email, reported to WWGS SLT. Not attributable to the rendering pipeline alone.
Next, I plan to extend the content format to support tables, images and per-seller links.
What's next
Phase 1 · live
Standard ad-hoc + dynamic-content email. One upload generates multiple seller-segment versions automatically.
Phase 2 · live Sep 2026
Hyper-personalization. One individually generated email per seller, one batch every business day.
Next
Extend the content contract to tables, images and per-seller links.
Later
Move generation from the shared machine to a server that marketing POCs can access.
View complete email ↗
View complete email ↗
View complete email ↗
