Custom Squishy Revision Log: When to Approve Tooling

Which sample and reference should every comment identify?

Every comment should identify both the sample being evaluated and the reference used to judge it. A revision number alone is insufficient when several physical units, colors or construction options arrive together.

Use a simple sequence such as R01, R02 and R03 for successive configurations, with a separate unit identifier for each physical sample. These are example identifiers, not supplier-assigned model numbers. Retain the previous revision rather than overwriting it, and give the reference package its own revision identifier.

The reference package should combine the signed physical sample, dimensional drawing, front and side views, color references, decoration artwork and critical-feature notes. Assign each reference a purpose: the drawing controls dimensions; the artwork controls decoration placement; the physical sample supports agreed tactile and appearance comparisons. Resolve conflicts before approval. This follows the practical design-freeze approach described in Custom Squishy Toy Design.

Keep identified, signed physical references with both parties. Record their material description, finish, signing date and custodian. If appearance or recovery later changes during storage or handling, document that change before using the sample to resolve a dispute.

For a catalog-derived project, start with the relevant Squishy Toys listing and copy the exact model identifier, product name and relevant labeled specifications into the project record. Keep the custom project identifier separate. Confirm whether a material description applies to the body, shell, filling or another component, and distinguish product dimensions from packaging dimensions.

Catalog identity example, not a completed sample evaluation or tooling approval: the current STS record identifies STS348379, Mini Clear Ice-Cube Squishy, 3.5 cm, with Packaging—OPP bag. Copy that SKU and catalog packaging field into the project-identity row when using this model as a catalog-derived starting reference. Give each physical sample and custom configuration its own identifier and revision. Record the agreed color, feel, size and appearance targets, actual observations and proposed actions separately; a catalog name or packaging description does not establish sample measurements, custom-tooling ownership, test coverage or approval.

Consolidated sample revision log

Use one row per feedback item, with separate fields for the agreed target, the observation and the proposed action. The following is a working record structure; its fields are purchasing controls, not a prescribed safety-test format.

How should color, feel, size and appearance feedback become actions?

Convert each comment into an attribute-specific comparison and a separately agreed action; do not turn an impression into a measured result. The examples below are proposed recording practices, not findings from tested samples.

Color: If an evaluator sees a darker body color than the reference, record the sample area, comparison reference and viewing conditions. Attach photographs for location and discussion, but do not make a phone image the sole color acceptance reference. A proposed follow-up can specify controlled lighting and an agreed visual or instrumental comparison. Do not invent a universal color-difference threshold.

Feel: Separate initial squeeze resistance, surface tack and recovery behavior instead of recording only softness. For a recovery comparison, agree compression depth, hold time, recovery endpoint and ambient conditions before timing samples. Record each unit separately. A difference between units warrants investigation; it does not, by itself, establish the cause. A rigid shape model can support geometry review but cannot establish the finished squishy's feel.

Size: Name the measurement points and sample condition. Measure the relaxed sample using the agreed orientation and method, then record the result beside the drawing target and tolerance. If the drawing changes, identify the new drawing revision rather than silently treating the measured sample as the new target.

Appearance: Mark the exact seam, molded feature, face detail or decoration edge involved. Replace a broad request for a better face with a marked reference showing the required position, orientation or shape. Where geometry changes, review affected decoration and dimensions again rather than assuming their previous approvals still apply.

A proposed check remains a proposal until the parties agree its method and acceptance criterion. Commercial sample screening also remains separate from product-safety testing. A safety failure can stop the affected specification immediately; it does not need to recur across several designs before action is taken.

When should the buyer approve tooling, request a revision or reject the sample?

Approve tooling when the configuration is identified, tooling-blocking items are closed and the authorized approver has signed the release. Request another revision when a correctable difference remains; reject the submitted revision when it cannot support the agreed configuration or an unresolved safety issue requires a stop.

Keep conditional acceptance distinct from permission to cut tooling. A record may state that a configuration is accepted subject to named corrections, but tooling remains on hold until those conditions are closed and release is signed. If a change is deliberately deferred to a later stage, document why it does not affect the tooling decision, who accepted that scope and when it must be resolved.

Define the approval stage. A geometry prototype, a material sample and a finished decorated sample answer different questions. Approval to make tooling is not automatically approval for bulk production. The later production reference should represent the construction and finish being authorized.

Using a signed reference with agreed tolerances is a practical purchasing recommendation, also reflected in the Evaluating Squishy Samples guidance. The signature records acceptance of an identified configuration; it is not a certification of every safety or performance requirement.

Tooling approval record

The tooling approval record should summarize the release decision and point back to the detailed log, not replace it. Complete the following fields with the actual project observations and approvals before authorizing tooling.

How should the log stay current after a new sample arrives?

Add the new sample revision to the same log, carry forward unresolved items and close them only against identified evidence from that revision. Keep earlier observations intact so reviewers can distinguish a correction from a changed target.

Mark the previous configuration as superseded when its replacement is accepted, but preserve its item history. A supplier acknowledgment that a change was made is not the buyer's verification that the replacement meets the target. Conversely, a documented, authorized deviation can close an item without pretending the original target was met.

Any post-approval change to geometry, construction, color or decoration should receive a controlled revision and an impact review. The record supports traceability; it does not itself prevent an undisclosed substitution. Link the approved configuration to subsequent production and inspection records so those checks have an identifiable comparison point.

For a tooling-release review, submit the consolidated log, identified reference package, current sample photographs, drawings and relevant supporting reports. Request one returned approval record identifying the authorized revision, unresolved conditions, responsible approver and tooling-release status.