vibe-creating-prompt

Files (2)

• SKILL.md
• SKILL.zh.md

SKILL.md (first lines)

# Vibe Creating Prompt Skill

## Overview

Vibe Creating distills what the user *actually wants to express* so the model can lock onto the visual center, the emotional direction, and the continuity of the experience. It amplifies creative intent, emotional value, key imagery, and visual coherence; it down-weights low-value technical parameters and mechanical execution language.

This skill is a *judgment-first* rewriter. It does not blindly shorten or "vibe-ify" everything. It first asks whether the input even belongs in the Vibe Creating lane, then chooses the lightest action that serves the user's intent.

## Quick Start

When you receive an input, run three steps:

1. **Judge whether it suits Vibe Creating (VC).** Is this a scene best expressed through story, emotion, memory, atmosphere, imagery, or experience flow — rather than precise execution?
2. **Decide the most appropriate handling right now.** Pass it through, lightly clean it up, rewrite it directly, ask a clarifying question first, keep it as-is, or offer an *optional* VC version.
3. **Only ask for what's missing.** Request the minimum information needed to complete the chosen action. Never interrogate the user just to satisfy your own classification.

Do not expose internal labels (`S1`, `E2`, "Mode 5", etc.) to the user. Judge internally; communicate plainly.

## Decision Framework — Scenario × Expression × Information

Decide along three axes. First **Scenario (S)** — does the underlying creative goal suit VC. Then **Expression (E)** — what form is the user's text already in, which sets *how much* to touch. **Information density (I)** runs in parallel as a stability check: whenever a must-have is missing, ask first, then route.

### Scenario fit (S)

- **S1 — VC-native.** Story, emotion, memory, atmosphere, imagery, experience flow. VC clearly helps.
- **S2 — Partially VC-suited.** Brand/product/character showcases, stylized ads. VC may help, but is optional.
- **S3 — Low VC fit.** UI demos, tutorials, step-by-step instructions, strict dialogue-synced long-form. The goal or workflow doesn't match VC.

### Expression form (E)

- **E1 — Close to VC already.** Reads like a vivid scene/story.
- **E2 — Mixed.** Creative content interleaved with execution language.
- **E3 — Precision-control writing.** Shot numbers, focal lengths, movement parameters, timecodes.

### Routing matrix (default action per cell)

| | **E1 — close to VC** | **E2 — mixed** | **E3 — precision control** |
|---|---|---|---|
| **S1 — VC-native** | Direct rewrite; if already polished → light cleanup or pass-through | Light cleanup, then rewrite — keep valid structure, order, emotional build | Treat as *VC-translatable*; strip low-value technical control, convert to natural visual description. Don't reject just because it's written as an execution script |
| **S2 — partial** | Light cleanup; if already usable → pass-through | Offer an *optional* VC version; let the user choose | Keep the original intent; gently note a VC rewrite is available on request |
| **S3 — low fit** | Stay close to the original; keep as-is if needed | Keep as-is or do very limited cleanup; only stylize on explicit request | Keep as-is; explain this fits a traditional shot-list workflow better than VC |

### Four hard routing rules

- **Missing info wins.** However well a scenario fits, if the visual anchor, main action, or style direction is missing, ask before writing.
- **User hard constraints win.** If the user explicitly asks to keep dialogue, music, shot numbers, parameters, paragraph structure, or a delivery format, do not delete them. A VC version is an *extra* version, or offered only after the user agrees.
- **Multi-shot keeps its structure.** When the user is already expressing one unified experience across shot paragraphs, don't flatten it into a single block of prose — but don't default to numbered output either unless they asked for numbers or lists.
- **Precision-control writing ≠ low-fit scenario.** Look at the *goal* first, then decide whether to translate. An execution-style script can still describe a deeply VC-suited scene.

### Information-density check (I)

Even a VC-perfect scenario can't be force-rewritten when a key element is missing. Ask first when: there's no clear visual anchor; only an abstract feeling with no subject/object/scene; a subject but no action or state; fragments with no main relationship or style direction; an ultra-short input that has a subject and event but no clear style/viewing-mode/key moment; or multi-shot content with jumps you can't see a reason for.

A strong VC prompt prioritizes these **four layers**. Fill whichever is missing first — don't mechanically demand all four:

1. **Visual anchor** — the thing that most deserves to be seen (a person / object / named concept / the VFX subject itself).
2. **Action or state** — what's happening (one action, state, or beat — just one).
3. **Local tonality** — how this moment *feels* (one mood word or adjective: backlit warm amber, slight handheld sway…).
4. **Video theme** — where the clip is used + its visual style.
   - *Use case:* concept short, micro-narrative, film pre-viz, emotional piece, knowledge/physics restoration, VFX fragment…
   - *Visual style:* photorealistic, cinematic, animation, claymation, Eastern ink-wash, cyberpunk, illustrated…

Asking principle: the density check is not a separate gate — it runs alongside S and E. Ask for the minimum needed to land the chosen action, usually in one round. For ultra-short, abstract, single-image inputs, prioritize turning the abstract word into the visible information a frame needs; if the direction is already mostly clear, give a first pass and ask about only the most critical 1–3 gaps.

## Interaction Policy

Internally complete the three judgments (**S / E / I**) — preliminary judgments are fine when info is short. Then choose an **action**:

> **pass-through · light cleanup · direct rewrite · ask first · keep as-is · optional VC version**

Handling principles:

- VC-suited but missing info → ask for the minimum needed for the current action.
- **When the input already has a clear subject, structure, time relationship, core imagery, and a clear emotional goal — and the text is already strongly generation-ready — default to pass-through.** Only do light cleanup if clarity needs a nudge; don't proactively rewrite.
- VC-suited but containing undeclared precision controls → you may down-weight, delete, or translate them by default; if you did, you **must** say so and tell the user they can ask to keep specific ones.
- Partially-suited scenarios → don't push VC; preserve the original or offer an optional VC version.
- Low-fit scenarios → explain it's a goal/workflow mismatch, not a rejection of the user's idea.
- User-specified dialogue, voiceover, music, SFX, structure, and parameters always take priority.

## Camera Language Policy

Camera language should not be deleted wholesale. What to remove is the low-value "tell the system how to shoot" technical parameters. What to preserve or translate is the "how should the viewer feel" intent.

**Demote or delete by default:**

- Focal lengths / mm numbers
- Camera-position jargon
- Movement parameters (speed multipliers, exact dolly distances)
- Shot numbers
- Depth of field, aperture, exposure, shutter
- Equipment notes, A/B cam, coverage
- Pure editing instructions

Translate intent instead of dropping it — e.g. "slow dolly-in" → "the gaze slowly closes in, building a sense of pressure."

**When the user explicitly asks to keep parameters:** obey the constraint first, then decide whether to *additionally* offer a VC version.

**When it's undeclared whether to keep precision control:**

- Don't treat technical control as a must-keep item.
- Default to the more generation-friendly VC creative version.
- Preserve whatever contributes to emotion, narrative, or viewing experience.
- For purely technical camera control, delete it or translate it into a natural result.
- Don't interrupt to confirm first — but if you weakened, deleted, or translated technical control, **say so briefly** in the output. If the user wants certain parameters/structure/rhythm beats kept, they can say so and you provide a constraint-preserving version.

## Sound & Constraint Priority

Dialogue, voiceover, music, SFX, lyrics, narration, and other explicitly specified sound content rank **above** creative optimization. You may reorder them, but you must **not** reword them, replace them, or delete a user's explicit sound requirement.

When rules conflict, resolve in this order:

1. **User-explicit content & hard constraints** — dialogue, VO, music, SFX, shot structure, parameter-keep requests, format requirements, style limits.
2. **Creative optimization** — distill story, emotion, memory, imagery, and a unified experience *without* breaking constraints.
3. **VC paradigm consistency** — only after the first two are satisfied, tighten the language further for model readability.

Supplementary rules:

- Dialogue/VO/music/SFX the user wrote out → keep verbatim.
- Visual and sound requirements written together → you may reorder, but never alter the sound content itself.

From Alisa0808/vibe-creating-skill, MIT.