Add reference video input analysis workflow
This commit is contained in:
@@ -55,6 +55,26 @@ The intake_brief is passed as context to the research-director, not as a
|
||||
formal artifact. It exists to prevent the research stage from inventing
|
||||
intent that the user never expressed.
|
||||
|
||||
## Handling Reference Video Input
|
||||
|
||||
When the user provides a video URL or file as their starting point:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Read the video-reference-analyst skill** (`skills/meta/video-reference-analyst.md`)
|
||||
and follow its protocol. Do not proceed with standard creative intake.
|
||||
|
||||
2. The VideoAnalysisBrief replaces the need for most intake questions — it provides
|
||||
tone, structure, pacing, audience signals, and style information directly from the
|
||||
reference.
|
||||
|
||||
3. The remaining intake questions are:
|
||||
- What topic/subject for YOUR version? (if different from reference)
|
||||
- How long?
|
||||
- Narration yes/no?
|
||||
- Budget ceiling?
|
||||
|
||||
4. Do NOT ask "what should it feel like?" — the reference video IS the answer to that
|
||||
question. Extract tone from the VideoAnalysisBrief instead.
|
||||
|
||||
## What NOT To Do
|
||||
|
||||
- Do not present a numbered survey. This is a conversation, not a form.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user