zooqueen
62bbc7766c
Every SKILL.md already declared the new name — name: frames, frames-cli, frames-core, and so on — but the directories were never moved, so the tree carried frames-* in content and hyperframes-* on disk. Everything that resolves a skill by path missed: the core-skill list, the plugin marketplace pin, and the docs the CLI reads at runtime. Eight tests failed on main because the files they open do not exist. The directories now match what the files say they are, and the guide the claude-design contract reads takes the name that contract already used.
3.2 KiB
Story spine — value-first narrative doctrine
Applies to the narrated, story-driven creation workflows — /product-launch-video, /pr-to-video, /faceless-explainer, and /general-video when the piece tells a story. It does not apply to /music-to-video (the track drives the arc), /motion-graphics (no narration — motion is the message), /embedded-captions and /talking-head-recut (the footage's story is already fixed), or /slideshow (the presenter owns the story). Do not force these rules onto an exempt workflow.
Each workflow's own story-design reference owns its archetypes, beat sequences, and frame vocabulary. This file owns three cross-workflow rules about order and justification — the reverse iceberg: lead with why it's valuable, not with what it is or how it was made.
1. The hook speaks the viewer's language
The first beat answers "why should I care" in outcome language — what the viewer gains, avoids, or finally understands. Subject-internal vocabulary is banned in the hook: file / function / API names for a code change; a feature list for a product; the source article's section headings for an explainer. Numbers are welcome only when they carry stakes ("40% faster cold starts"), never inventory ("23 files changed").
2. Reverse iceberg — value before evidence
The value claim (the brief's message) lands by the second beat. Everything after it is evidence in service of that claim — the diff, the mechanism, the feature demo, the site's screenshots. Implementation is the footnote of the story, not the spine.
Self-check on the finished beat list:
- Delete every evidence beat — the remaining beats must still state the value on their own.
- Delete the value beats — if the video still seems to work, it was a feature tour / diff readout, not a story.
Structure is value-first; the voice stays whatever the workflow prescribes (a PR video keeps its plain, no-hype developer voice — leading with value is an ordering decision, not a marketing register).
3. The storyboard is a proposal, not a listing
When Step 3 presents the plan (a checkpoint gate — frames-core/references/brief-contract.md § 1):
-
Open by echoing the strategy line: "This video tells [audience] that [message]."
-
Present the frames as a markdown table, one row per frame:
Frame Beat On screen Why 01 — Not anymore hook · 9s States the old pain and resolves it in the same breath. Lands the value claim in beat 1 Why is the frame's job in the story (from its
narrativeRole), traced back to the message — a frame whose why cannot be traced to the message is a frame to cut, not to decorate. -
Recommendations keep their receipts (brief-contract § 3): the archetype choice, the beat count, and any beat the user might question each state their basis.
The proposal shape — echo line → frame table → style / duration footer → "approve or adjust" — is the cheapest place to iterate: a frame change here costs 30 seconds; the same change after build costs minutes.