docs(skills): the agent presents a tailor-made storyboard instead of a Studio board - #4150
Conversation
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Automations to automatically generate PRs for you. |
…d of a Studio board Adds the storyboard recipe (decisions first, beat fields, a self-contained storyboard.html contact sheet, a review round) distilled from the launch films, and rewrites the review loop, brief contract, storyboard format and workflow steps that still described the deleted board and comments file.
… sheet Review found: the recipe's storyboard.html cell spec (real fonts, real colors) contradicted review-loop's own sketch definition (wireframe, no brand treatment). The sketch is static, not unstyled; only motion is deferred to the build pass. Also fixes a frame-packet boundary note, a craft-device citation, and a provenance overclaim.
32e3eb9 to
92d873d
Compare
jrusso1020
left a comment
jrusso1020
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed at 92d873db189540ce383e86b242ca5462beef5c6d (true merge-base 85537e1c7d, 2 commits, 23 files). Approving — the sweep is thorough and the removals are clean. Two wording items below that I'd fix before merge, neither blocking.
Note on the request: I hadn't reviewed 32e3eb9e, so I didn't lean on the range-diff equivalence — this is a first full read at the new head, not a re-stamp.
What I verified
- The
types.tscomment correction is accurate.FrameStatushas no consumer inpackages/studio— the only references arepackages/core/src/storyboard/*and the four skills'scripts/lib/storyboard.mjs. The old "the Studio renders progress from this" was already stale; "scripts and the agent read progress from this" is right. - Both deletions from
storyboard-format.mdleave nothing dangling.frame-commentswent 2 → 0 references repo-wide (the section here plus thebrief-contract.md§ 1 paragraph, both removed in this PR);srcExistswent 1 → 0, and that one occurrence was the sentence being deleted — nothing in the repo ever implemented it. skills-manifest.jsonis correct. Regenerating withpackages/cli/scripts/gen-skills-manifest.tsreports "already in sync — no change (21 skills)". The 8 updated hashes are exactly the 8 skill dirs the PR touches, andhyperframes-creative78 → 79 matches the one added file.- Gates that cover these paths pass:
scripts/lint-skills.ts→ "Checked 33 skill file(s) and 7 registry snapshot(s) against 409 registry items — no issues found";oxfmt --checkclean on all changed files. - No mirror drift. The touched skills (
hyperframes,hyperframes-creative,hyperframes-cli,faceless-explainer,general-video,music-to-video,pr-to-video,product-launch-video) are disjoint from the.claude/skills/.agents/skillsrepo-native set, socheck-skill-mirror.mjsisn't in play. storyboard.htmlis introduced consistently — 0 → 22 references — and § 4 deliberately keeps the Studio preview for the final look, which is why the remaining "final Studio preview" lines ingeneral-video/SKILL.mdandfaceless-explainer/SKILL.mdare correct rather than missed.- Workers can reach the new artifact.
subagent-dispatch.mdgives a worker "the prompt and the files on disk", sostoryboard.html#frame-NNis readable — no dispatch-scope change needed.
1. The sketch-is-styled reconciliation didn't reach two places
The second commit's whole point is that a sketch is now a styled frame. That landed in review-loop.md § 2 ("drawn with the full frame.md treatment (real fonts, real colors)") and in frame-worker-core.md, which drops "(the sketch is deliberately unstyled)" for "the sketch already carries the full frame.md treatment". Two sites still say the opposite:
skills/hyperframes/references/storyboard-format.md:97— this PR replaced "Studio chips it blue." with "Nothing is drawn yet beyond the approved layout." on the line that definesbuilt. Read alongside the same line's "(a wireframe sketch or better)", that reads as "nothing is styled yet", which is what § 2 now rules out. The charitable reading is that it scopes content (no elements beyond the approved layout) rather than styling — but it's the status definition, and it's the sentence this PR added, so it's worth disambiguating rather than leaving to the reader.skills/hyperframes/references/review-loop.md:29(§ 3) — still "building means dressing that layout (full design treatment, real assets, motion)" and "must still read as the approved wireframe, fully dressed."frame-worker-core.mdnow tells the worker the treatment is already there and to deliver "the approved sketch, now moving". A worker reading § 3 and a worker reading its own role file get different instructions about whether the brand pass is theirs.
2. Three cross-skill citations in the new file lost their path prefix
skills/hyperframes-creative/references/storyboard-recipe.md:3 (and :7) cite brief-contract.md, review-loop.md and storyboard-format.md bare, but all three live in skills/hyperframes/references/ — there are no such siblings in hyperframes-creative/references/. The convention is applied correctly everywhere else, including in this PR:
review-loop.md:5(this PR) →hyperframes-creative/references/storyboard-recipe.mdstory-spine.md:24,typography.md:63(pre-existing) →hyperframes/references/brief-contract.md
story-spine.md at :52 is same-directory and correct as-is. Nothing lints link targets, so this won't be caught downstream.
Nit
storyboard-format.md:29 and :34 still describe src and poster in terms of "the tile poster" — board vocabulary in the file this PR was sweeping. The poster field itself is live (parsed at parseStoryboard.ts:270), so it's only the phrasing.
— Rames
This branch was successfully deployed
2 participants
What changes
The agent presents the storyboard as a self-contained page it writes itself,
storyboard.html, instead of the removed Studio board. The plan is still proposed in chat first; the layout sketch is now a browser page the user opens, styled with the real brand tokens, not a Studio surface.New:
skills/hyperframes-creative/references/storyboard-recipe.md— the method (decisions first, a beat-field table, thestoryboard.htmlcell spec, the review round), distilled from the shipped launch films' storyboards.Rewritten:
review-loop.md,brief-contract.md,storyboard-format.md, the three narrated workflows' SKILL.md,general-video,music-to-video,hyperframes-cli,script-format.md,frame-worker-core.md,production-loop.md,intent-interview.md,brief-format.md,routes/motion-graphics.md,docs/prompting/{overview,storyboards}.mdx, and one code comment inpackages/core/src/storyboard/types.ts— every place that still described the deleted board, the Studio poster, "chips it blue", or the.hyperframes/frame-comments.jsonchannel (which had no reader anywhere in the tree).Deleted: the dead comments-file schema and its two references.
Stacked on #4140 (merged), which removed the Studio storyboard view this replaces.
Example storyboard.html
A worked example at desktop width, so the review is about whether it's beautiful, not hypothetical:
Pre-review pass
An independent adversarial review (separate agent, own detached worktree) found two real defects, both fixed at this head:
frame-packets-core.mjs) takes everything after a## Frame Nheading to the next one — a## Lockedsection appended after the recipe's own instruction would have leaked into the last frame's worker packet. Fixed: it's written above the first frame, like the sibling sections.storyboard.htmlcell spec (real fonts, real brand colors) contradictedreview-loop.md's own sketch definition ("wireframe... no full brand treatment"). Reconciled: the sketch is static, not unstyled — the fullframe.mdtreatment lands in the sketch; only motion is deferred to the build pass.Also fixed: a craft-device citation split across two docs pages, and a provenance sentence overclaiming what the five launch films specifically evidence.
Audited / Trusting / Not exercised
coreSkillContent.test.ts,figma/skillContent.test.tsphrase requirementsskills-manifest.jsonin syncgen-skills-manifest.ts --check)comment-checkstoryboard.htmlNo telemetry numbers, tracker keys, internal hostnames, or person names in the new text.