Dt Methods
MicrosoftOfficialPublished by Microsoft
- Skill
- Guidelines
- Business and productivity
- MIT
- No issues found
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
The dt-methods skill provides a structured reference system for AI agents to coach teams through the Design Thinking process. It organizes guidance into three layers: core method references for day-to-day activities, deep references for advanced facilitation and recovery, and industry-specific context to tailor vocabulary and constraints. The skill covers nine major industries, including energy, healthcare, and financial services, ensuring that coaching is grounded in the specific operational realities and regulatory environments of the user's sector.
What it does
- Provides step-by-step guidance for nine core Design Thinking methods.
- Offers advanced facilitation techniques and recovery strategies for complex scenarios.
- Maps Design Thinking concepts to industry-specific terminology and constraints.
- Integrates telemetry expectations for session artifacts to ensure observable outcomes.
- Supplies industry-specific empathy tools and stakeholder considerations.
- Supports tailoring of coaching based on the active method and identified industry context.
When to use it
- When facilitating a Design Thinking session and requiring method-specific guidance.
- When a team needs advanced troubleshooting or recovery techniques during a workshop.
- When applying Design Thinking within a specific industry to ensure relevant vocabulary and constraints are respected.
- When defining telemetry or audit trails for Design Thinking session artifacts.
Advantages
- Ensures consistent coaching across the entire Design Thinking lifecycle.
- Reduces friction by using industry-appropriate language and concepts.
- Provides a clear path for scaling from basic methods to advanced facilitation.
- Integrates operational and regulatory awareness into the design process.
Usage examples
- “How should I facilitate a brainstorming session for a team in the energy sector?”
- The agent will load the brainstorming method reference and the energy industry context, providing guidance that uses energy-specific terms like 'reliability concern' and 'forced outage rate' while emphasizing safety and regulatory constraints.
- “We are stuck during the user research phase; what advanced techniques can we use?”
- The agent will access the deep reference for the Design Research method to provide advanced facilitation strategies and recovery techniques to help the team overcome their current roadblock.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/dt-methods/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip dt-methods.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by Microsoft
Design Thinking Methods Skill
Entrypoint for Design Thinking method coaching knowledge. The dt-coach agent loads the method reference matching the active method in coaching state, the matching deep reference when advanced technique is needed, and the industry reference when an industry context applies.
How to use this skill
Read the method reference for the method currently active in coaching state to ground day-to-day coaching.
Read the matching deep reference when the conversation needs advanced facilitation, recovery techniques, or expert frameworks beyond the core method guidance.
Read the industry reference when the team has identified one of the nine covered industries as their context, and weave its vocabulary, constraints, and empathy tools into method-specific guidance.
Read dt-coach-telemetry.md when DT session artifacts need observable telemetry expectations grounded in
telemetry-foundations.
Method references
| Method | Name | Core reference | Deep reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scope Conversations | method-01-scope.md | method-01-deep.md |
| 2 | Design Research | method-02-research.md | method-02-deep.md |
| 3 | Input Synthesis | method-03-synthesis.md | method-03-deep.md |
| 4 | Brainstorming | method-04-brainstorming.md | method-04-deep.md |
| 5 | User Concepts | method-05-concepts.md | method-05-deep.md |
| 6 | Low-Fidelity Prototypes | method-06-lofi-prototypes.md | method-06-deep.md |
| 7 | High-Fidelity Prototypes | method-07-hifi-prototypes.md | method-07-deep.md |
| 8 | User Testing | method-08-testing.md | method-08-deep.md |
| 9 | Iteration at Scale | method-09-iteration.md | method-09-deep.md |
Industry context references
Load the matching reference when the team identifies its industry context.
| Reference | When to load |
|---|---|
| industry-energy.md | Energy-sector vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-financial-services.md | Financial services vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-healthcare.md | Healthcare vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-manufacturing.md | Manufacturing vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-nonprofit-social-impact.md | Nonprofit and social impact vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-pharmaceuticals-life-sciences.md | Pharmaceuticals and life sciences vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-professional-services.md | Professional services vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-public-sector.md | Public sector and government vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
| industry-retail-cpg.md | Retail and consumer goods vocabulary, constraints, empathy tools, and reference scenario. |
Skill layout
.
├── SKILL.md
└── references/
├── method-01-scope.md
├── method-01-deep.md
├── method-02-research.md
├── method-02-deep.md
├── method-03-synthesis.md
├── method-03-deep.md
├── method-04-brainstorming.md
├── method-04-deep.md
├── method-05-concepts.md
├── method-05-deep.md
├── method-06-lofi-prototypes.md
├── method-06-deep.md
├── method-07-hifi-prototypes.md
├── method-07-deep.md
├── method-08-testing.md
├── method-08-deep.md
├── method-09-iteration.md
├── method-09-deep.md
├── industry-energy.md
├── industry-financial-services.md
├── industry-healthcare.md
├── industry-manufacturing.md
├── industry-nonprofit-social-impact.md
├── industry-pharmaceuticals-life-sciences.md
├── industry-professional-services.md
├── industry-public-sector.md
├── industry-retail-cpg.md
└── dt-coach-telemetry.mdFiles
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer871 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.1 KiB
- SKILL.md6.5 KiB
- references/dt-coach-telemetry.md1.5 KiB
- references/industry-energy.md9.1 KiB
- references/industry-financial-services.md10.7 KiB
- references/industry-healthcare.md7.7 KiB
- references/industry-manufacturing.md6.7 KiB
- references/industry-nonprofit-social-impact.md15.6 KiB
- references/industry-pharmaceuticals-life-sciences.md20.1 KiB
- references/industry-professional-services.md14.0 KiB
- references/industry-public-sector.md12.1 KiB
- references/industry-retail-cpg.md16.5 KiB
- references/method-01-deep.md10.4 KiB
- references/method-01-scope.md10.2 KiB
- references/method-02-deep.md15.6 KiB
- references/method-02-research.md7.0 KiB
- references/method-03-deep.md13.9 KiB
- references/method-03-synthesis.md8.9 KiB
- references/method-04-brainstorming.md13.6 KiB
- references/method-04-deep.md16.5 KiB
- references/method-05-concepts.md17.1 KiB
- references/method-05-deep.md17.7 KiB
- references/method-06-deep.md16.3 KiB
- references/method-06-lofi-prototypes.md17.2 KiB
- references/method-07-deep.md10.9 KiB
- references/method-07-hifi-prototypes.md9.8 KiB
- references/method-08-deep.md15.0 KiB
- references/method-08-testing.md11.5 KiB
- references/method-09-deep.md17.2 KiB
- references/method-09-iteration.md11.9 KiB
references/method-05-concepts.md
title: 'Design Thinking Method 5: User Concepts' description: Design Thinking Method 05 (User Concepts) for shaping brainstorm ideas into coherent concepts for users.
Transform brainstorming themes from Method 4 into structured, visualizable concepts through three-lens evaluation and stakeholder alignment. Method 5 bridges divergent ideation and tangible prototyping, ensuring concepts are desirable, feasible, and viable before investment in lo-fi prototypes.
Coaching Identity Extension
Method 5 extends the foundational dt-coaching-foundation coaching-identity Think/Speak/Empower framework with concept articulation and evaluation guidance:
Think: Assess concept clarity, three-lens balance (Desirability/Feasibility/Viability), and stakeholder perspective coverage. Recognize when concepts drift toward over-polish or when evaluation lacks rigor across all three lenses.
Speak: Share observations about concept comprehension, visualization simplicity, and evaluation completeness. "This concept description is getting detailed—can you convey it in one sentence?" or "We've explored desirability, but what makes this feasible with current constraints?"
Empower: Offer choices about concept development direction and evaluation depth. "Ready to visualize this concept or refine the core idea first?" Close with agency-preserving options about stakeholder perspectives to explore.
Coaching Hats
Concept Architect
Activation: During concept planning and articulation (5a, 5b)
Focus: Structured concept development, lo-fi visualization, constraint integration
Guide theme-to-concept translation with 2-4 word titles and 1-2 sentence descriptions
Enforce 30-second comprehension standard and 15-second napkin sketch quality
Direct visualization prompt creation toward stick figures and minimal lines
Integrate environmental and workflow constraints from Method 4
Block premature detail: "This is implementation-level—what's the core interaction?"
Three-Lens Evaluator
Activation: During concept evaluation and stakeholder alignment (5c)
Focus: Balanced D/F/V assessment, multi-perspective facilitation, conflict discovery
Guide evaluation across all three lenses (Desirability, Feasibility, Viability) without premature rejection
Facilitate Silent Review sequence: Silent Review → Understanding Check → Gap Identification → Resonance Assessment
Surface stakeholder conflicts constructively: "The factory worker values speed while the safety officer needs verification—how do we balance these?"
Document evaluation rationale for Method 6 handoff
Avoid directive judgment—enable discovery, not prescription
Sub-Method Phases
Method 5a: Concept Planning
Select themes from Method 4 brainstorming convergence and plan concept development approach.
Activities:
Review converged themes (3-5) from Method 4c with solution philosophies
Identify environmental and workflow constraints from Method 3/4 integration
Select 2-3 themes for concept development (quality over quantity)
Map constraint integration points per selected theme
Plan stakeholder perspectives for evaluation
Exit Criteria: Selected themes with clear selection rationale, constraint mapping complete, stakeholder perspectives identified
AI Pattern: Theme evaluation and constraint discovery facilitation
Coaching Hat: Concept Architect
Method 5b: Concept Articulation
Structure concepts into visualizable, testable formats with YAML artifact generation.
Activities:
Craft concept titles (2-4 words) that immediately convey the core idea
Write concept descriptions (1-2 sentences) covering what and how
Identify purpose and validation target for each concept
Document purpose and validation target in stakeholder-alignment.md for reference during Method 5c evaluation
Create visualization prompts emphasizing stick figures, minimal lines, plain backgrounds
Generate
concepts.ymlartifact with name, description, file, prompt fieldsValidate concepts against 30-second comprehension test
Exit Criteria: concepts.yml artifact created, all concepts pass 30-second comprehension test, image prompts follow lo-fi directives
AI Pattern: Title/description refinement, visualization prompt generation, YAML artifact construction
Coaching Hat: Concept Architect
Method 5c: Concept Evaluation
Validate concepts through stakeholder alignment and three-lens evaluation framework.
Activities:
Facilitate Silent Review sequence with stakeholder representatives
Conduct Understanding Check to verify concept comprehension
Guide Gap Identification to surface misalignments and conflicts
Assess Resonance across stakeholder groups
Evaluate concepts through Desirability, Feasibility, Viability lenses
Document concept selection rationale and evaluation criteria
Prepare Method 6 handoff with prioritized concepts (1-2 selected)
When stakeholders are unavailable: Guide user through role-playing multiple perspectives with explicit acknowledgment that simulated feedback should be validated with real stakeholders when available. Document simulation in stakeholder-alignment.md.
Exit Criteria: Stakeholder alignment completed via Silent Review sequence, D/F/V evaluation documented, concept selection rationale captured, Method 6 handoff prepared
AI Pattern: Multi-perspective analysis, alignment facilitation, conflict articulation, resonance pattern identification
Coaching Hat: Three-Lens Evaluator
YAML Concept Card Specification
Each concept is structured as a YAML artifact consumed by visualization tools and Method 6 prototyping.
Schema:
concepts:
- name: Concept Title # 2-4 words, immediately conveys idea
description: >- # 1-2 sentences, what + how
Brief explanation of solution.
file: concept-title.png # kebab-case derived from name
prompt: >- # Stick figures, minimal, lo-fi
Create a simple stick-figure sketch showing...Field Requirements:
name: 2-4 words, clear and specificdescription: May use YAML folded block (>-), covers what and how in 1-2 sentencesfile: kebab-case filename with.pngextensionprompt: Must include lo-fi style directives (stick figures, minimal lines, plain background, black-and-white line art)
Multi-Line Format: Use YAML folded block (>-) for description and prompt fields to maintain readability. Literal blocks (|-) and single-line strings are acceptable alternatives.
Quality Rules: No extra fields beyond these four, strict adherence to lo-fi prompt patterns, artifact ready for optional image generation with M365 Copilot or modern GPT image models such as gpt-image-2
Image Prompt Generation
Visualization prompts target M365 Copilot or modern GPT image models such as gpt-image-2 with deliberate lo-fi enforcement.
Style Directives (required in all prompts):
"stick figures" or "simple line drawing"
"minimal lines" and "plain white background"
"black-and-white line art"
"no shading" or "no detail"
Content Guidance:
Core interaction only, not implementation details
Single scenario or use case per concept
Environmental context when relevant to constraints
15-second napkin sketch standard (what you'd draw in 15 seconds)
Describe people by role and action; leave out names, age, gender, ethnicity, and appearance from interviews or personas unless
ObservedorReportedevidence shows the trait matters, and then describe the need instead of the traitAfter generation, review images for stereotyped depictions and regenerate when needed (see the representation safeguards in the
dt-rpi-integrationimage prompt generation reference)
Coaching Patterns:
Redirect requests for high-fidelity mockups: "Let's start with a stick-figure version testing the core idea"
Block polished presentations: "This visualization looks production-ready—strip it back to test the assumption"
Guide toward simplicity: "What's the one interaction this concept enables? Show only that."
Example Prompt (good):
"Create a simple stick-figure sketch showing a factory worker holding a phone near a machine while a checkmark appears above their head. Minimal lines, plain white background, black-and-white line art, no shading."
Anti-Pattern (too detailed):
"Create a detailed interface mockup showing a smartphone app with buttons, menus, and a photo capture feature integrated with a machine vision system and database backend."
Three-Lens Evaluation Framework
Balanced concept assessment across Desirability, Feasibility, and Viability. All three lenses matter—evaluation is facilitative, not judgmental.
Desirability Lens
Focus: Does the concept resonate with stakeholders? Will they understand and value it?
Evaluation Questions:
Do stakeholders understand the concept in 30 seconds or less?
Does the concept address a real need or pain point?
Can stakeholders envision themselves using this solution?
Does the Silent Review reveal strong resonance or confusion?
What stakeholder groups show highest/lowest resonance?
Measured Through: Silent Review comprehension, Resonance Assessment ratings, stakeholder feedback patterns
Feasibility Lens
Focus: Can it be built with available technology, constraints, and resources?
Evaluation Questions:
Does the concept integrate identified environmental and workflow constraints?
Are technical assumptions realistic given current capabilities?
What physical, spatial, or tooling limitations affect this concept?
Can this be prototyped and tested in Method 6 within lo-fi constraints?
What technical unknowns require validation?
Measured Through: Constraint integration analysis, technical assumption identification, prototype planning assessment
Viability Lens
Focus: Does it create organizational value across multiple stakeholder perspectives?
Evaluation Questions:
Do multiple stakeholder groups see value in this concept?
What value proposition does each stakeholder archetype gain?
Are there stakeholder conflicts requiring trade-off decisions?
Does the concept align with organizational goals and priorities?
What risks or compliance concerns does this concept introduce?
Measured Through: Multi-stakeholder value proposition analysis, conflict discovery, coalition building patterns
Coaching Guidance:
Encourage complete lens coverage before concept rejection
Facilitate conflict articulation without forcing resolution
Document trade-off rationale for Method 6 handoff
Avoid premature lens rejection: "This feels hard to build" doesn't eliminate desirability and viability exploration
Lo-Fi Enforcement Mechanisms
Method 5 enforces deliberate roughness to focus validation on core assumptions, not aesthetics.
Quality Thresholds:
30-second comprehension test: Stakeholders must understand concepts in 30 seconds or less
15-second napkin sketch standard: Visualizations show only what you'd draw in 15 seconds to convey the idea
Anti-Polish Coaching Patterns:
"This concept description is getting detailed—can you convey it in one sentence?"
"Before adding more specifics, have we validated the core assumption with stakeholders?"
"This visualization looks complete—what's the roughest version that tests the idea?"
Progressive Hint Engine Adaptation (when concepts drift toward over-polish):
Level 1 (Broad): "This is looking pretty detailed. What's the one core idea we need to validate?"
Level 2 (Contextual): "Before refining the visualization, want to check whether stakeholders understand the basic interaction?"
Level 3 (Specific): "This concept has implementation details that Method 6 prototyping should test. Strip it back to the core user value."
Level 4 (Direct): "This has crossed into solution specification. Create a new concept testing only the core assumption, using a 15-second napkin sketch style."
Escalation Triggers:
Level 1 → 2: User adds implementation detail after initial hint
Level 2 → 3: User continues adding detail after contextual reminder
Level 3 → 4: Concept crosses into solution specification after specific redirection
Scrappy Principle Alignment: Rough concepts invite structural feedback ("Does this solve the right problem?"). Polished concepts invite cosmetic feedback ("I'd change the wording here"). Maintain roughness to preserve validation quality.
Quality Standards
Concept Clarity: All concepts pass 30-second comprehension test with stakeholder representatives
Visualization Simplicity: Image prompts include lo-fi style directives (stick figures, minimal lines, plain background)
YAML Compliance: concepts.yml artifact follows specification exactly with name, description, file, prompt fields
Three-Lens Coverage: Desirability, Feasibility, and Viability evaluated for all prioritized concepts
Stakeholder Alignment: Silent Review sequence completed (Silent Review → Understanding Check → Gap Identification → Resonance Assessment)
Rationale Documentation: Concept selection rationale captured with evaluation criteria for Method 6 handoff
Goals
Accomplish
Enable rapid validation through structured, visualizable concepts
Facilitate shared understanding across diverse stakeholder groups
Ground abstract brainstorming themes in concrete user scenarios and constraints
Discover stakeholder alignment and conflicts early before prototyping investment
Prepare concepts for Method 6 prototyping with clear scope and priorities
Avoid
Skipping stakeholder validation (Silent Review sequence is required, not optional)
Over-polishing concepts beyond lo-fi standards (violates 30-second comprehension and 15-second sketch thresholds)
Single-lens evaluation (all three lenses—D/F/V—matter for balanced assessment)
Rushing to implementation without alignment discovery and conflict articulation
Creating concepts without environmental and workflow constraint integration from Methods 3/4
Success Indicators
Artifact Generation: concepts.yml created with 2-3 structured concepts following specification
Comprehension Validation: Each concept passes 30-second comprehension test with stakeholder representatives
Lo-Fi Quality: Image prompts follow lo-fi style directives (stick figures, minimal lines, plain background)
Stakeholder Process: Silent Review sequence completed with all identified stakeholder perspectives
Evaluation Completeness: D/F/V evaluation documented for prioritized concepts with supporting evidence
Selection Rationale: Concept selection reasoning captured with trade-off decisions and alignment patterns
Handoff Readiness: Method 6 handoff prepared with 1-2 prioritized concepts, evaluation results, and constraint integration findings
Input from Method 4
Converged Themes: 3-5 solution themes with underlying philosophies and representative ideas from Method 4c convergence
Constraint Integration: Environmental, physical, and workflow constraints identified in Method 3 and reinforced in Method 4
Stakeholder Implications: Value proposition preview per theme from multi-perspective brainstorming
D/F/V Preview: Preliminary Desirability/Feasibility/Viability considerations surfaced during convergence
Brainstorming Artifacts: Method 4 session outputs for context and rationale review
Output to Method 6
Prioritized Concepts: 1-2 selected concepts from Method 5c evaluation with clear value propositions
YAML Artifact: concepts.yml with structured concept definitions and visualization prompts
Stakeholder Alignment: Silent Review results, resonance patterns, and stakeholder conflict documentation
Evaluation Rationale: Concept selection reasoning with D/F/V assessment and trade-off decisions
Constraint Context: Environmental, workflow, and technical constraints integrated into selected concepts
Prototype Scope: Clear assumptions to test and validation priorities for Method 6 lo-fi prototyping
Artifacts
Location: .copilot-tracking/dt/{project-slug}/method-05-user-concepts/
Files:
concepts.yml— (Required) Structured concept definitions with name, description, file, prompt fields{concept-name}.png— (Optional) Generated concept visualization images, typically created between Method 5 and Method 6 using M365 Copilot or modern GPT image models such asgpt-image-2. Not required for Method 6 handoff.stakeholder-alignment.md— (Recommended) Silent Review results, D/F/V evaluation, resonance assessment documentationmethod-06-handoff.md— (Required) Prioritized concepts (1-2 selected) with evaluation rationale and constraint context for prototyping
Cross-Method Consistency
Maintains DT coaching principles: end-user validation focus, environmental constraint application, multi-stakeholder perspectives, and iterative "fail fast, learn fast" refinement within concept evaluation and selection.
All DT coaching artifacts are scoped to
.copilot-tracking/dt/{project-slug}/. Never write DT artifacts directly under.copilot-tracking/dt/without a project-slug directory.
Requirements and compatibility
Written for: GitHub Copilot, Claude Code
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Needs: Claude Code frontmatter
Security
No issues found by our static scan· No issues found
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Published by
- Microsoft
- Publisher
- Microsoft (Official)
- Source
- microsoft/hve-core · .github/skills/design-thinking/dt-methods · commit f425e94
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft or Microsoft.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download dt-methods.zip