Initial release — OpenMontage: the first open-source agentic video production system
11 production pipelines, 47 tools, 124 agent skills. Supports cloud APIs (fal.ai, OpenAI, ElevenLabs, Suno, HeyGen, Runway) and free local providers (diffusers, Piper TTS, WAN 2.1, Hunyuan, CogVideo). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
calesthio
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
|
||||
# Reviewer — Meta Skill
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
After completing any pipeline stage's work — before checkpointing. You are the quality gate between "work done" and "work accepted." This skill replaces the Python reviewer class with an instruction-driven self-review protocol.
|
||||
|
||||
Every stage gets reviewed. No exceptions. The review quality determines whether the final video is worth watching.
|
||||
|
||||
## Protocol
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 1: Load Review Context
|
||||
|
||||
Before reviewing, gather:
|
||||
1. **Review focus items** from the pipeline manifest for this stage (`review_focus` field)
|
||||
2. **Success criteria** from the manifest for this stage (`success_criteria` field)
|
||||
3. **Active playbook** quality rules
|
||||
4. **The artifact** produced by the stage
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2: Schema Validation
|
||||
|
||||
First, the non-negotiable check:
|
||||
- Validate the artifact against its JSON schema (`schemas/artifacts/<name>.schema.json`)
|
||||
- If schema validation fails, this is a **critical** finding — fix immediately, do not proceed
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 3: Review Against Focus Items
|
||||
|
||||
For each `review_focus` item from the manifest:
|
||||
1. Evaluate the artifact against this specific criterion
|
||||
2. Assign a severity:
|
||||
- **critical** — Must fix before proceeding. The artifact is broken, incomplete, or dangerously wrong.
|
||||
- **suggestion** — Should fix. Improves quality significantly but doesn't block progress.
|
||||
- **nitpick** — Could fix. Minor polish that's nice-to-have.
|
||||
3. Write a specific, actionable finding (not vague)
|
||||
|
||||
**Good finding:** "Section 3 narration is 180 words for a 10-second window — that's 1080 wpm, impossible to speak. Cut to 25 words."
|
||||
**Bad finding:** "Script might be too long."
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 4: Cross-Check Against Playbook
|
||||
|
||||
If a style playbook is active, verify:
|
||||
- [ ] Color references match playbook palette
|
||||
- [ ] Transition types are in the playbook's allowed set
|
||||
- [ ] Pacing rules are respected (min/max durations)
|
||||
- [ ] Asset descriptions include playbook style cues
|
||||
- [ ] Quality rules are not violated
|
||||
|
||||
Each violation is a **suggestion** severity finding.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 5: Evaluate Success Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
For each `success_criteria` item from the manifest:
|
||||
- Is the criterion met? (yes/no/partial)
|
||||
- If not met, create a **critical** finding
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 6: Make a Decision
|
||||
|
||||
Count findings by severity:
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Action |
|
||||
|----------|--------|
|
||||
| 0 critical, any suggestions/nitpicks | **Pass** — proceed to checkpoint. Note suggestions for the record. |
|
||||
| 1+ critical findings | **Revise** — fix all critical findings, then re-review (max 2 rounds). |
|
||||
| After 2 revision rounds, still critical | **Pass with warnings** — proceed anyway, note unresolved issues. Never block indefinitely. |
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 7: Record Review
|
||||
|
||||
Structure your review as:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Review: [stage_name] — Round [N]
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision:** PASS / REVISE / PASS_WITH_WARNINGS
|
||||
|
||||
### Findings
|
||||
|
||||
1. [CRITICAL] Title of finding
|
||||
- Description: What's wrong
|
||||
- Action: What to fix
|
||||
- Status: pending / fixed / accepted / deferred
|
||||
|
||||
2. [SUGGESTION] Title of finding
|
||||
- Description: What could be better
|
||||
- Action: How to improve
|
||||
- Status: pending / accepted / deferred
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary
|
||||
- Critical: N (N fixed)
|
||||
- Suggestions: N
|
||||
- Nitpicks: N
|
||||
- Playbook violations: N
|
||||
- Success criteria met: N/M
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Principles
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Be specific, not vague.** "The hook is weak" is useless. "The hook asks a question but doesn't create urgency — try leading with the surprising stat from key_point #2" is actionable.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Critical means critical.** Don't inflate severity. A missing schema field is critical. A slightly wordy paragraph is a suggestion. A comma splice is a nitpick.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Two rounds max.** The goal is shipping, not perfection. After two revision rounds, pass with warnings and move on. Perfectionism kills pipelines.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Review the artifact, not the process.** You're checking the output, not how it was produced. If the brief is compelling, it doesn't matter if the agent used an unusual approach.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Playbook is law.** If the playbook says "no more than 3 colors on screen," that's not a suggestion — it's a constraint. Violations are always flagged.
|
||||
|
||||
## Stage-Specific Review Guidance
|
||||
|
||||
| Stage | What matters most |
|
||||
|-------|-----------------|
|
||||
| idea | Hook uniqueness, research depth, angle diversity |
|
||||
| script | Timing accuracy, narrative arc, enhancement cue density |
|
||||
| scene_plan | Full coverage, visual variety, asset feasibility |
|
||||
| assets | File existence, style consistency, budget adherence |
|
||||
| edit | Timeline coverage, audio sync, subtitle presence |
|
||||
| compose | Playability, duration accuracy, audio quality |
|
||||
| publish | SEO quality, metadata completeness, export packaging |
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user