"I had to work outside during a heavy downpour."
2)I think I would let the word "downpour" do its work, and delete "heavy" as redundant. There are no other kinds of downpours but heavy ones.
3) I would not repeat the going outside phrases, so I would delete the second one
4) The standard expression is "soaking wet" and (less often) "sopping wet." The expression "I got drenched" is often used.
> The phrase "wringing wet" is usually reserved for clothing or fabrics, rather then people (even if the people have clothes on.). That is because we squeeze water out of clothing by "wringing" it
> On the other hand, it is better to AVOID "standard expressions" just because their commonness has drained them of freshness and interest.
5) Your hair might get ruffled by wind, but it could not be ruffled if it were soaking wet -- it would be too heavy with water to get "ruffled," even if it were also windy as well as rainy.
> Your hair might get plastered to your head, or strands of it might get plastered to your face.
6) Saying your hair got "wet" in this downpour is kind of tame. It is a weak word that dulls the sentence by reining in its imagery.
7) You have to repeat "my" before "shoes."
> I'm not sure why. Possibly it is because "shoes" are too different from "hair." I think you could say, "My face and head got wet" or "my shirt and shoes got wet."
> But when it is "my hair and garden plants" or "my shirt and face," then you need to repeat the word "my." Probably it is orienting the reader to a shift in the topic.
8) I have never heard "studded with mud." It is interesting to read because it is a new expression.
> But at the same time it is distracting, because the reader's attention is diverted into trying to formulate a picture of "studded with mud."
I had to work outside in a wild downpour. I got drenched. My clothes got wringing wet,
the rain plastered my hair to my face, and my shoes turned into heavy balls of mud.
The wind nearly tipped me over.
Student or Learner