mindforge-cc 8.1.1 → 8.2.0

package/.planning/archive/v8-cleanup/.agents/skills/ai-video-generation/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
+---
+name: ai-video-generation
+description: "Generate AI videos with Google Veo, Seedance, Wan, Grok and 40+ models via inference.sh CLI. Models: Veo 3.1, Veo 3, Seedance 1.5 Pro, Wan 2.5, Grok Imagine Video, OmniHuman, Fabric, HunyuanVideo. Capabilities: text-to-video, image-to-video, lipsync, avatar animation, video upscaling, foley sound. Use for: social media videos, marketing content, explainer videos, product demos, AI avatars. Triggers: video generation, ai video, text to video, image to video, veo, animate image, video from image, ai animation, video generator, generate video, t2v, i2v, ai video maker, create video with ai, runway alternative, pika alternative, sora alternative, kling alternative"
+allowed-tools: Bash(infsh *)
+---
+
+# AI Video Generation
+
+Generate videos with 40+ AI models via [inference.sh](https://inference.sh) CLI.
+
+![AI Video Generation](https://cloud.inference.sh/app/files/u/4mg21r6ta37mpaz6ktzwtt8krr/01kg2c0egyg243mnyth4y6g51q.jpeg)
+
+## Quick Start
+
+> Requires inference.sh CLI (`infsh`). [Install instructions](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inference-sh/skills/refs/heads/main/cli-install.md)
+
+```bash
+infsh login
+
+# Generate a video with Veo
+infsh app run google/veo-3-1-fast --input '{"prompt": "drone shot flying over a forest"}'
+```
+
+
+## Available Models
+
+### Text-to-Video
+
+| Model | App ID | Best For |
+|-------|--------|----------|
+| Veo 3.1 Fast | `google/veo-3-1-fast` | Fast, with optional audio |
+| Veo 3.1 | `google/veo-3-1` | Best quality, frame interpolation |
+| Veo 3 | `google/veo-3` | High quality with audio |
+| Veo 3 Fast | `google/veo-3-fast` | Fast with audio |
+| Veo 2 | `google/veo-2` | Realistic videos |
+| **P-Video** | `pruna/p-video` | Fast, economical, with audio support |
+| **WAN-T2V** | `pruna/wan-t2v` | Economical 480p/720p |
+| Grok Video | `xai/grok-imagine-video` | xAI, configurable duration |
+| Seedance 1.5 Pro | `bytedance/seedance-1-5-pro` | With first-frame control |
+| Seedance 1.0 Pro | `bytedance/seedance-1-0-pro` | Up to 1080p |
+
+### Image-to-Video
+
+| Model | App ID | Best For |
+|-------|--------|----------|
+| Wan 2.5 | `falai/wan-2-5` | Animate any image |
+| Wan 2.5 I2V | `falai/wan-2-5-i2v` | High quality i2v |
+| **WAN-I2V** | `pruna/wan-i2v` | Economical 480p/720p |
+| **P-Video** | `pruna/p-video` | Fast i2v with audio |
+| Seedance Lite | `bytedance/seedance-1-0-lite` | Lightweight 720p |
+
+### Avatar / Lipsync
+
+| Model | App ID | Best For |
+|-------|--------|----------|
+| OmniHuman 1.5 | `bytedance/omnihuman-1-5` | Multi-character |
+| OmniHuman 1.0 | `bytedance/omnihuman-1-0` | Single character |
+| Fabric 1.0 | `falai/fabric-1-0` | Image talks with lipsync |
+| PixVerse Lipsync | `falai/pixverse-lipsync` | Realistic lipsync |
+
+### Utilities
+
+| Tool | App ID | Description |
+|------|--------|-------------|
+| HunyuanVideo Foley | `infsh/hunyuanvideo-foley` | Add sound effects to video |
+| Topaz Upscaler | `falai/topaz-video-upscaler` | Upscale video quality |
+| Media Merger | `infsh/media-merger` | Merge videos with transitions |
+
+## Browse All Video Apps
+
+```bash
+infsh app list --category video
+```
+
+## Examples
+
+### Text-to-Video with Veo
+
+```bash
+infsh app run google/veo-3-1-fast --input '{
+  "prompt": "A timelapse of a flower blooming in a garden"
+}'
+```
+
+### Grok Video
+
+```bash
+infsh app run xai/grok-imagine-video --input '{
+  "prompt": "Waves crashing on a beach at sunset",
+  "duration": 5
+}'
+```
+
+### Image-to-Video with Wan 2.5
+
+```bash
+infsh app run falai/wan-2-5 --input '{
+  "image_url": "https://your-image.jpg"
+}'
+```
+
+### AI Avatar / Talking Head
+
+```bash
+infsh app run bytedance/omnihuman-1-5 --input '{
+  "image_url": "https://portrait.jpg",
+  "audio_url": "https://speech.mp3"
+}'
+```
+
+### Fabric Lipsync
+
+```bash
+infsh app run falai/fabric-1-0 --input '{
+  "image_url": "https://face.jpg",
+  "audio_url": "https://audio.mp3"
+}'
+```
+
+### PixVerse Lipsync
+
+```bash
+infsh app run falai/pixverse-lipsync --input '{
+  "image_url": "https://portrait.jpg",
+  "audio_url": "https://speech.mp3"
+}'
+```
+
+### Video Upscaling
+
+```bash
+infsh app run falai/topaz-video-upscaler --input '{"video_url": "https://..."}'
+```
+
+### Add Sound Effects (Foley)
+
+```bash
+infsh app run infsh/hunyuanvideo-foley --input '{
+  "video_url": "https://silent-video.mp4",
+  "prompt": "footsteps on gravel, birds chirping"
+}'
+```
+
+### Merge Videos
+
+```bash
+infsh app run infsh/media-merger --input '{
+  "videos": ["https://clip1.mp4", "https://clip2.mp4"],
+  "transition": "fade"
+}'
+```
+
+## Related Skills
+
+```bash
+# Full platform skill (all 150+ apps)
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@infsh-cli
+
+# Pruna P-Video (fast & economical)
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@p-video
+
+# Google Veo specific
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@google-veo
+
+# AI avatars & lipsync
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@ai-avatar-video
+
+# Text-to-speech (for video narration)
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@text-to-speech
+
+# Image generation (for image-to-video)
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@ai-image-generation
+
+# Twitter (post videos)
+npx skills add inference-sh/skills@twitter-automation
+```
+
+Browse all apps: `infsh app list`
+
+## Documentation
+
+- [Running Apps](https://inference.sh/docs/apps/running) - How to run apps via CLI
+- [Streaming Results](https://inference.sh/docs/api/sdk/streaming) - Real-time progress updates
+- [Content Pipeline Example](https://inference.sh/docs/examples/content-pipeline) - Building media workflows
+

package/.planning/archive/v8-cleanup/.agents/skills/critique/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
+---
+name: critique
+description: Evaluate design from a UX perspective, assessing visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load, and overall quality with quantitative scoring, persona-based testing, and actionable feedback. Use when the user asks to review, critique, evaluate, or give feedback on a design or component.
+user-invocable: true
+argument-hint: "[area (feature, page, component...)]"
+---
+
+## MANDATORY PREPARATION
+
+Invoke /frontend-design — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the **Context Gathering Protocol**. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-impeccable first. Additionally gather: what the interface is trying to accomplish.
+
+---
+
+Conduct a holistic design critique, evaluating whether the interface actually works — not just technically, but as a designed experience. Think like a design director giving feedback.
+
+## Phase 1: Design Critique
+
+Evaluate the interface across these dimensions:
+
+### 1. AI Slop Detection (CRITICAL)
+
+**This is the most important check.** Does this look like every other AI-generated interface from 2024-2025?
+
+Review the design against ALL the **DON'T** guidelines in the frontend-design skill — they are the fingerprints of AI-generated work. Check for the AI color palette, gradient text, dark mode with glowing accents, glassmorphism, hero metric layouts, identical card grids, generic fonts, and all other tells.
+
+**The test**: If you showed this to someone and said "AI made this," would they believe you immediately? If yes, that's the problem.
+
+### 2. Visual Hierarchy
+- Does the eye flow to the most important element first?
+- Is there a clear primary action? Can you spot it in 2 seconds?
+- Do size, color, and position communicate importance correctly?
+- Is there visual competition between elements that should have different weights?
+
+### 3. Information Architecture & Cognitive Load
+> *Consult [cognitive-load](reference/cognitive-load.md) for the working memory rule and 8-item checklist*
+- Is the structure intuitive? Would a new user understand the organization?
+- Is related content grouped logically?
+- Are there too many choices at once? Count visible options at each decision point — if >4, flag it
+- Is the navigation clear and predictable?
+- **Progressive disclosure**: Is complexity revealed only when needed, or dumped on the user upfront?
+- **Run the 8-item cognitive load checklist** from the reference. Report failure count: 0–1 = low (good), 2–3 = moderate, 4+ = critical.
+
+### 4. Emotional Journey
+- What emotion does this interface evoke? Is that intentional?
+- Does it match the brand personality?
+- Does it feel trustworthy, approachable, premium, playful — whatever it should feel?
+- Would the target user feel "this is for me"?
+- **Peak-end rule**: Is the most intense moment positive? Does the experience end well (confirmation, celebration, clear next step)?
+- **Emotional valleys**: Check for onboarding frustration, error cliffs, feature discovery gaps, or anxiety spikes at high-stakes moments (payment, delete, commit)
+- **Interventions at negative moments**: Are there design interventions where users are likely to feel frustrated or anxious? (progress indicators, reassurance copy, undo options, social proof)
+
+### 5. Discoverability & Affordance
+- Are interactive elements obviously interactive?
+- Would a user know what to do without instructions?
+- Are hover/focus states providing useful feedback?
+- Are there hidden features that should be more visible?
+
+### 6. Composition & Balance
+- Does the layout feel balanced or uncomfortably weighted?
+- Is whitespace used intentionally or just leftover?
+- Is there visual rhythm in spacing and repetition?
+- Does asymmetry feel designed or accidental?
+
+### 7. Typography as Communication
+- Does the type hierarchy clearly signal what to read first, second, third?
+- Is body text comfortable to read? (line length, spacing, size)
+- Do font choices reinforce the brand/tone?
+- Is there enough contrast between heading levels?
+
+### 8. Color with Purpose
+- Is color used to communicate, not just decorate?
+- Does the palette feel cohesive?
+- Are accent colors drawing attention to the right things?
+- Does it work for colorblind users? (not just technically — does meaning still come through?)
+
+### 9. States & Edge Cases
+- Empty states: Do they guide users toward action, or just say "nothing here"?
+- Loading states: Do they reduce perceived wait time?
+- Error states: Are they helpful and non-blaming?
+- Success states: Do they confirm and guide next steps?
+
+### 10. Microcopy & Voice
+- Is the writing clear and concise?
+- Does it sound like a human (the right human for this brand)?
+- Are labels and buttons unambiguous?
+- Does error copy help users fix the problem?
+
+## Phase 2: Present Findings
+
+Structure your feedback as a design director would:
+
+### Design Health Score
+> *Consult [heuristics-scoring](reference/heuristics-scoring.md)*
+
+Score each of Nielsen's 10 heuristics 0–4. Present as a table:
+
+| # | Heuristic | Score | Key Issue |
+|---|-----------|-------|-----------|
+| 1 | Visibility of System Status | ? | [specific finding or "—" if solid] |
+| 2 | Match System / Real World | ? | |
+| 3 | User Control and Freedom | ? | |
+| 4 | Consistency and Standards | ? | |
+| 5 | Error Prevention | ? | |
+| 6 | Recognition Rather Than Recall | ? | |
+| 7 | Flexibility and Efficiency | ? | |
+| 8 | Aesthetic and Minimalist Design | ? | |
+| 9 | Error Recovery | ? | |
+| 10 | Help and Documentation | ? | |
+| **Total** | | **??/40** | **[Rating band]** |
+
+Be honest with scores. A 4 means genuinely excellent. Most real interfaces score 20–32.
+
+### Anti-Patterns Verdict
+**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells from the skill's Anti-Patterns section. Be brutally honest.
+
+### Overall Impression
+A brief gut reaction — what works, what doesn't, and the single biggest opportunity.
+
+### What's Working
+Highlight 2–3 things done well. Be specific about why they work.
+
+### Priority Issues
+The 3–5 most impactful design problems, ordered by importance.
+
+For each issue, tag with **P0–P3 severity** (consult [heuristics-scoring](reference/heuristics-scoring.md) for severity definitions):
+- **[P?] What**: Name the problem clearly
+- **Why it matters**: How this hurts users or undermines goals
+- **Fix**: What to do about it (be concrete)
+- **Suggested command**: Which command could address this (from: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive)
+
+### Persona Red Flags
+> *Consult [personas](reference/personas.md)*
+
+Auto-select 2–3 personas most relevant to this interface type (use the selection table in the reference). If `.github/copilot-instructions.md` contains a `## Design Context` section from `teach-impeccable`, also generate 1–2 project-specific personas from the audience/brand info.
+
+For each selected persona, walk through the primary user action and list specific red flags found:
+
+**Alex (Power User)**: No keyboard shortcuts detected. Form requires 8 clicks for primary action. Forced modal onboarding. ⚠️ High abandonment risk.
+
+**Jordan (First-Timer)**: Icon-only nav in sidebar. Technical jargon in error messages ("404 Not Found"). No visible help. ⚠️ Will abandon at step 2.
+
+Be specific — name the exact elements and interactions that fail each persona. Don't write generic persona descriptions; write what broke for them.
+
+### Minor Observations
+Quick notes on smaller issues worth addressing.
+
+**Remember**:
+- Be direct — vague feedback wastes everyone's time
+- Be specific — "the submit button" not "some elements"
+- Say what's wrong AND why it matters to users
+- Give concrete suggestions, not just "consider exploring..."
+- Prioritize ruthlessly — if everything is important, nothing is
+- Don't soften criticism — developers need honest feedback to ship great design
+
+## Phase 3: Ask the User
+
+**After presenting findings**, use targeted questions based on what was actually found. ask the user directly to clarify what you cannot infer. These answers will shape the action plan.
+
+Ask questions along these lines (adapt to the specific findings — do NOT ask generic questions):
+
+1. **Priority direction**: Based on the issues found, ask which category matters most to the user right now. For example: "I found problems with visual hierarchy, color usage, and information overload. Which area should we tackle first?" Offer the top 2–3 issue categories as options.
+
+2. **Design intent**: If the critique found a tonal mismatch, ask whether it was intentional. For example: "The interface feels clinical and corporate. Is that the intended tone, or should it feel warmer/bolder/more playful?" Offer 2–3 tonal directions as options based on what would fix the issues found.
+
+3. **Scope**: Ask how much the user wants to take on. For example: "I found N issues. Want to address everything, or focus on the top 3?" Offer scope options like "Top 3 only", "All issues", "Critical issues only".
+
+4. **Constraints** (optional — only ask if relevant): If the findings touch many areas, ask if anything is off-limits. For example: "Should any sections stay as-is?" This prevents the plan from touching things the user considers done.
+
+**Rules for questions**:
+- Every question must reference specific findings from Phase 2 — never ask generic "who is your audience?" questions
+- Keep it to 2–4 questions maximum — respect the user's time
+- Offer concrete options, not open-ended prompts
+- If findings are straightforward (e.g., only 1–2 clear issues), skip questions and go directly to Phase 4
+
+## Phase 4: Recommended Actions
+
+**After receiving the user's answers**, present a prioritized action summary reflecting the user's priorities and scope from Phase 3.
+
+### Action Summary
+
+List recommended commands in priority order, based on the user's answers:
+
+1. **`/command-name`** — Brief description of what to fix (specific context from critique findings)
+2. **`/command-name`** — Brief description (specific context)
+...
+
+**Rules for recommendations**:
+- Only recommend commands from: /animate, /quieter, /optimize, /adapt, /clarify, /distill, /delight, /onboard, /normalize, /audit, /harden, /polish, /extract, /bolder, /arrange, /typeset, /critique, /colorize, /overdrive
+- Order by the user's stated priorities first, then by impact
+- Each item's description should carry enough context that the command knows what to focus on
+- Map each Priority Issue to the appropriate command
+- Skip commands that would address zero issues
+- If the user chose a limited scope, only include items within that scope
+- If the user marked areas as off-limits, exclude commands that would touch those areas
+- End with `/polish` as the final step if any fixes were recommended
+
+After presenting the summary, tell the user:
+
+> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
+>
+> Re-run `/critique` after fixes to see your score improve.

package/.planning/archive/v8-cleanup/.agents/skills/critique/reference/cognitive-load.md

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+# Cognitive Load Assessment
+
+Cognitive load is the total mental effort required to use an interface. Overloaded users make mistakes, get frustrated, and leave. This reference helps identify and fix cognitive overload.
+
+---
+
+## Three Types of Cognitive Load
+
+### Intrinsic Load — The Task Itself
+Complexity inherent to what the user is trying to do. You can't eliminate this, but you can structure it.
+
+**Manage it by**:
+- Breaking complex tasks into discrete steps
+- Providing scaffolding (templates, defaults, examples)
+- Progressive disclosure — show what's needed now, hide the rest
+- Grouping related decisions together
+
+### Extraneous Load — Bad Design
+Mental effort caused by poor design choices. **Eliminate this ruthlessly** — it's pure waste.
+
+**Common sources**:
+- Confusing navigation that requires mental mapping
+- Unclear labels that force users to guess meaning
+- Visual clutter competing for attention
+- Inconsistent patterns that prevent learning
+- Unnecessary steps between user intent and result
+
+### Germane Load — Learning Effort
+Mental effort spent building understanding. This is *good* cognitive load — it leads to mastery.
+
+**Support it by**:
+- Progressive disclosure that reveals complexity gradually
+- Consistent patterns that reward learning
+- Feedback that confirms correct understanding
+- Onboarding that teaches through action, not walls of text
+
+---
+
+## Cognitive Load Checklist
+
+Evaluate the interface against these 8 items:
+
+- [ ] **Single focus**: Can the user complete their primary task without distraction from competing elements?
+- [ ] **Chunking**: Is information presented in digestible groups (≤4 items per group)?
+- [ ] **Grouping**: Are related items visually grouped together (proximity, borders, shared background)?
+- [ ] **Visual hierarchy**: Is it immediately clear what's most important on the screen?
+- [ ] **One thing at a time**: Can the user focus on a single decision before moving to the next?
+- [ ] **Minimal choices**: Are decisions simplified (≤4 visible options at any decision point)?
+- [ ] **Working memory**: Does the user need to remember information from a previous screen to act on the current one?
+- [ ] **Progressive disclosure**: Is complexity revealed only when the user needs it?
+
+**Scoring**: Count the failed items. 0–1 failures = low cognitive load (good). 2–3 = moderate (address soon). 4+ = high cognitive load (critical fix needed).
+
+---
+
+## The Working Memory Rule
+
+**Humans can hold ≤4 items in working memory at once** (Miller's Law revised by Cowan, 2001).
+
+At any decision point, count the number of distinct options, actions, or pieces of information a user must simultaneously consider:
+- **≤4 items**: Within working memory limits — manageable
+- **5–7 items**: Pushing the boundary — consider grouping or progressive disclosure
+- **8+ items**: Overloaded — users will skip, misclick, or abandon
+
+**Practical applications**:
+- Navigation menus: ≤5 top-level items (group the rest under clear categories)
+- Form sections: ≤4 fields visible per group before a visual break
+- Action buttons: 1 primary, 1–2 secondary, group the rest in a menu
+- Dashboard widgets: ≤4 key metrics visible without scrolling
+- Pricing tiers: ≤3 options (more causes analysis paralysis)
+
+---
+
+## Common Cognitive Load Violations
+
+### 1. The Wall of Options
+**Problem**: Presenting 10+ choices at once with no hierarchy.
+**Fix**: Group into categories, highlight recommended, use progressive disclosure.
+
+### 2. The Memory Bridge
+**Problem**: User must remember info from step 1 to complete step 3.
+**Fix**: Keep relevant context visible, or repeat it where it's needed.
+
+### 3. The Hidden Navigation
+**Problem**: User must build a mental map of where things are.
+**Fix**: Always show current location (breadcrumbs, active states, progress indicators).
+
+### 4. The Jargon Barrier
+**Problem**: Technical or domain language forces translation effort.
+**Fix**: Use plain language. If domain terms are unavoidable, define them inline.
+
+### 5. The Visual Noise Floor
+**Problem**: Every element has the same visual weight — nothing stands out.
+**Fix**: Establish clear hierarchy: one primary element, 2–3 secondary, everything else muted.
+
+### 6. The Inconsistent Pattern
+**Problem**: Similar actions work differently in different places.
+**Fix**: Standardize interaction patterns. Same type of action = same type of UI.
+
+### 7. The Multi-Task Demand
+**Problem**: Interface requires processing multiple simultaneous inputs (reading + deciding + navigating).
+**Fix**: Sequence the steps. Let the user do one thing at a time.
+
+### 8. The Context Switch
+**Problem**: User must jump between screens/tabs/modals to gather info for a single decision.
+**Fix**: Co-locate the information needed for each decision. Reduce back-and-forth.