skillpacks 0.1.1 → 0.1.2

package/packs/remotion/claude/video-script/ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md

@@ -57,7 +57,9 @@ The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected
 
 **Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the first `review` alignment page must explicitly contain proposed research scope, source plan, assumptions/confidence, recommended output path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before synthesized research begins and before any working packet, canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.
 
-**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-video-script-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-video-script-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, research-scope approval gates, and a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that shows the future Stage 2 review shape before research starts. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-video-script-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-video-script-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+**Stage 2 review-page template.** Stage 1 scope-review pages must include a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that previews the exact section sequence, table shapes, evidence treatment, visual density, and approval gates the user will see after research; make it specific enough for the user to flag preferred content formats, grouping, labels, visuals, and evidence density before the agent does heavy research. After scope approval and research, the Stage 2 review page must include these sections as structured HTML, not as raw Markdown dumps: `Research Scope Approved` status block with approved scope, source plan, output paths, and unresolved caveats; `Executive Findings` or a skill-specific top-findings section with confidence labels; `Evidence Matrix` mapping claim, evidence/source/path, inference, confidence, assumptions, and decision impact; `Working Packet Review` with the complete working-packet substance rendered as purpose-built HTML sections, lists, tables, matrices, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams; `Alternatives / Rejected or Lower-Confidence Findings`; `Source Coverage & Gaps`; `Assumptions / Confidence Register`; `Proposed Canonical Artifacts & File Changes`; a required `User Format Preferences` gate asking whether the layout, tables, grouping, visuals, labels, and evidence density match expectations; and a required `Final Artifact Approval` gate for Stage 3 readiness. Raw Markdown packet text, search logs, or source notes may appear only as supplemental source views after the rendered review UI and never replace the Stage 2 review sections.
 
 **Required inline questions.** In `review` pages, each gate must contain at least one required inline question placed directly under the content it governs, inside a visually distinct question block. Each question must use radio-button inputs and include two standing options after the skill-generated choices: "Other / None of the above" backed by a multi-line text box for free-form input, and "Need clarification" backed by an optional notes box where the user can explain what is unclear. When any radio option other than "Other" or "Need clarification" is selected, show an optional "Additional notes" text box beneath it so the user can qualify their choice. Generate questions based on what genuinely needs user input -- do not add filler questions. Do not create a separate bottom "Decisions & Clarifications" section. Confirmed pages must not keep these as required input controls; render the answered decisions as read-only records.
 

package/packs/remotion/claude/video-script/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## v0.2 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Standardized active pack and skill install guidance on `npx skillpacks install <pack-or-skill>` instead of agent-native `/pack install` or `$pack install` recommendations.
+
 ## v0.0
 
 - Archived previous skill contract.

package/packs/remotion/claude/video-script/SKILL.md

@@ -2,13 +2,13 @@
 name: video-script
 description: Draft a scene-by-scene video script with timing, visual direction, narration, and source attribution from upstream creator-media artifacts
 type: planning
-version: v0.1
+version: v0.2
 argument-hint: "<topic or slug> [--type launch|explainer|demo|testimonial] [--duration short|medium|long] [--series <series-slug>]"
 ---
 
 ## Pack Availability Guard
 
-Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
 
 # Video Script
 

package/packs/remotion/claude/video-script/archive/v0.1/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+---
+name: video-script
+description: Draft a scene-by-scene video script with timing, visual direction, narration, and source attribution from upstream creator-media artifacts
+type: planning
+version: v0.1
+argument-hint: "<topic or slug> [--type launch|explainer|demo|testimonial] [--duration short|medium|long] [--series <series-slug>]"
+---
+
+## Pack Availability Guard
+
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+
+# Video Script
+
+Invoke as `/video-script`.
+
+Read upstream research and spec artifacts, interview on video goal and audience, then produce a scene-by-scene script with narration text, visual direction, timing, and source attribution.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+At least one of these artifacts must exist:
+
+- `research/youtube/product-led-media-map-<slug>.md`
+- `specs/youtube/series-<slug>.md`
+- `research/youtube/creator-positioning-<slug>.md`
+
+Enhancement tiers based on available artifacts:
+
+- **Tier 1:** Creator positioning only — voice but thin proof.
+- **Tier 2:** + product-led-media-map — product-grounded claims.
+- **Tier 3:** + series-spec — format-consistent episode.
+- **Tier 4:** + journey-map + gtm — full-funnel narrative with aha moments and GTM messaging.
+
+## Inputs
+
+- `research/youtube/product-led-media-map-<slug>.md`
+- `specs/youtube/series-<slug>.md`
+- `research/youtube/creator-positioning-<slug>.md`
+- `research/youtube/content-programming-<slug>.md`
+- `research/journey-map.md` (or `research/{app}/journey-map.md`)
+- `research/gtm.md` (or `research/{app}/gtm.md`)
+
+## Process
+
+0. Resolve arguments: topic/slug, video type (`launch`, `explainer`, `demo`, `testimonial`), duration (`short`, `medium`, `long`), optional series slug.
+1. Load all available upstream artifacts. Determine enhancement tier.
+2. Interview (AskUserQuestion): video goal, target audience, narrative approach, tone, production constraints.
+3. Draft narrative arc using the type-specific template. Present for approval before proceeding.
+4. Write scene-by-scene script: narration text, visual direction, on-screen text, music cues, timing, source attribution.
+5. Present complete script with duration estimate, asset requirements, and ungrounded claims. Validate with user.
+6. Write output only after user confirmation.
+
+### Narrative Arc Templates
+
+- **Launch:** Hook → Context → Reveal → Proof/Demo → Transformation (aha moment) → CTA → Outro
+- **Explainer:** Hook → Problem → Concept → Application → Summary → CTA → Outro
+- **Demo:** End result first → Setup → Walkthrough → Result → CTA → Outro
+- **Testimonial:** Strongest quote → Problem framing → Discovery → Experience → Results → CTA → Outro
+
+## Output
+
+Create the `specs/youtube/` directory if it does not exist.
+
+Write `specs/youtube/video-script-<slug>.md` with:
+
+- **Video Brief:** type, audience, goal, duration target, series context, enhancement tier.
+- **Narrative Arc:** high-level structure with per-section timing.
+- **Scene Breakdown:** per scene — narration text, visual direction, on-screen text/graphics, music/mood, duration, source attribution via `<!-- Source: path — claim -->` comments.
+- **CTA Strategy:** primary CTA, placement timing, end-screen plan.
+- **Asset Requirements:** footage, screen recordings, graphics, music, b-roll — checklist with status.
+- **Source Attribution Summary:** table mapping claim → upstream artifact → section.
+- **Ungrounded Claims:** claims without research backing, marked `<!-- UNGROUNDED -->`.
+- **Next Steps.**
+
+Write `specs/youtube/video-script-<slug>-interview.md` with the interview log.
+
+## Approved Artifact Handoff
+
+After an approved synthesized write, explicit write/update mode, or any direct artifact mutation:
+
+- List every created or updated synthesized artifact path in the final response.
+- State the verification performed, such as readback, schema/check command, or why no executable verification applies for a Markdown-only strategy artifact.
+- Check and report the relevant git status for intended artifacts when the project is a git repository. If intended artifacts are modified or untracked, make the next action shipping, committing, or an explicit dirty-artifact handoff before recommending downstream strategy work.
+- Do not imply the research workflow is complete while approved artifacts remain untracked or uncommitted unless the user explicitly asked not to ship.
+- If stopping for approval before writing, the approval request remains the next action; do not include downstream routing.
+
+## Intent-Aware Routing
+
+Before applying the default `## Next-Skill Routing` sequence, classify the user's immediate intent and route to the missing action that best serves that intent:
+
+- Strategy refresh: recommend the missing or stale positioning, programming, portfolio, metrics, or product-media artifact.
+- Recording prep: recommend the missing series spec, script, build proof, walkthrough guide, or validation artifact needed before recording.
+- Upload prep: recommend packaging, title/thumbnail, description, chapters, or final metadata work before broader strategy work.
+- Performance review: recommend metrics, cadence, portfolio, peer benchmark, or owner-analytics export work before new content planning.
+- Owner analytics or private/manual platform evidence: route to an explicit manual/guide handoff instead of inventing unavailable metrics.
+- Dirty intended artifacts: route to shipping/commit/handoff first, not another creator strategy skill.
+
+Use the default next-skill sequence only when no stronger user intent, missing artifact, manual blocker, or dirty-artifact handoff applies.
+
+## Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/video-script-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Source-attribute every factual claim with inline `<!-- Source: path — claim -->` comments.
+- Mark ungrounded claims with `<!-- UNGROUNDED -->`.
+- Respect series format when `--series` is provided.
+- Respect anti-positioning from creator-positioning.
+- Present the script before writing — never write until the user confirms.
+- Do not prescribe thumbnail design or editing cuts.
+- Do not expose secrets, private customer data, or unreleased commitments.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/packs/remotion/claude/youtube-format-research/ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md

@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports,
 
 The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected by the upgrade script). The bundled ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md receives tier-appropriate rendering guidance from the generator.
 
+**Context intake.** This skill declares `context_intake: artifact_only` (Artifact-driven). Work from concrete artifacts, data, logs, or existing instructions by default; ask concise clarification questions only when the available artifacts are missing, contradictory, or unsafe to interpret.
+
 **Alignment lifecycle.** Alignment pages have three lifecycle states. `review` is the draft/pre-approval page: it contains the complete deliverable preview, evidence, required inline gate questions, section feedback controls, local section-feedback YAML only after a section feedback choice is selected, and one bottom `Compile Responses` control. `confirmed` is the post-approval page after the agent has consumed final compiled response YAML, made any approved user-requested edits, and written or updated the approved canonical artifacts. A confirmed page is finished and current for the completed alignment cycle, but it remains amendable when later research changes or extends the conclusions. `amended` is a future revision of a confirmed page: archive the previous confirmed page first, mark what changed, preserve the prior approval record, and highlight the new evidence, decisions, or scope that changed the earlier conclusion.
 
 **Central alignment index.** When a research-producing skill writes or updates an HTML alignment page, also maintain the repository's central alignment index. Look for `alignment/index.html` at the repository root; if the target repo documents a different central alignment-index path, use that path and report it. If the index does not exist, create it as a self-contained HTML page that works from `file://`, links to every active `alignment/*.html` page except itself, and includes the newly written page. Every index entry must include the page's alignment date in a muted meta span after the link, formatted `YYYY-MM-DD`, for example `<a href="page.html">Title</a> <span class="meta">2026-06-09</span>`. The alignment date is the review or confirmed date written inside the page itself; new pages use today's date. If the index exists, update it instead of blindly appending: preserve valid existing entries, metadata, and entry dates; remove duplicate entries for the same page path; keep links repo-relative; and include the new or updated page. When updating an existing index, add a date only to entries that are missing one, deriving it from the page's internal alignment date, or from file history when the page has no internal date. If a `new` marker is used, combine it with the date as `<span class="meta">new · YYYY-MM-DD</span>`, and remove stale `new` markers from entries that are no longer the latest addition.
@@ -57,7 +59,9 @@ The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected
 
 **Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the first `review` alignment page must explicitly contain proposed research scope, source plan, assumptions/confidence, recommended output path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before synthesized research begins and before any working packet, canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.
 
-**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-youtube-format-research-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-youtube-format-research-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, research-scope approval gates, and a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that shows the future Stage 2 review shape before research starts. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-youtube-format-research-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-youtube-format-research-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+**Stage 2 review-page template.** Stage 1 scope-review pages must include a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that previews the exact section sequence, table shapes, evidence treatment, visual density, and approval gates the user will see after research; make it specific enough for the user to flag preferred content formats, grouping, labels, visuals, and evidence density before the agent does heavy research. After scope approval and research, the Stage 2 review page must include these sections as structured HTML, not as raw Markdown dumps: `Research Scope Approved` status block with approved scope, source plan, output paths, and unresolved caveats; `Executive Findings` or a skill-specific top-findings section with confidence labels; `Evidence Matrix` mapping claim, evidence/source/path, inference, confidence, assumptions, and decision impact; `Working Packet Review` with the complete working-packet substance rendered as purpose-built HTML sections, lists, tables, matrices, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams; `Alternatives / Rejected or Lower-Confidence Findings`; `Source Coverage & Gaps`; `Assumptions / Confidence Register`; `Proposed Canonical Artifacts & File Changes`; a required `User Format Preferences` gate asking whether the layout, tables, grouping, visuals, labels, and evidence density match expectations; and a required `Final Artifact Approval` gate for Stage 3 readiness. Raw Markdown packet text, search logs, or source notes may appear only as supplemental source views after the rendered review UI and never replace the Stage 2 review sections.
 
 **Research-pack translation.** For business, devtool, game, creator, and media research packs, render the claim/evidence/inference/assumption/decision-impact structure, source coverage categories appropriate to the domain, lower-confidence findings, and downstream implications before asking for approval or routing to the next skill.
 

package/packs/remotion/claude/youtube-format-research/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,13 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## v0.6 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Clarified staged research review pages must render complete working-packet substance as structured HTML UI, with raw Markdown packet text allowed only as a supplemental source view.
+
+## v0.5 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Standardized active pack and skill install guidance on `npx skillpacks install <pack-or-skill>` instead of agent-native `/pack install` or `$pack install` recommendations.
+
 ## v0.4 - 2026-06-10
 
 - Changed report-first research flow to require alignment-page research-scope approval before synthesized findings, candidate rankings, recommendations, working packets, or canonical research writes.

package/packs/remotion/claude/youtube-format-research/SKILL.md

@@ -2,14 +2,14 @@
 name: youtube-format-research
 description: Break down a YouTube video's format, visual system, pacing, editing grammar, motion, audio, and Remotion-ready production patterns
 type: research
-version: v0.4
+version: v0.6
 argument-hint: "<video URL or ID> [--target remotion|script|style-guide] [--compare <video URL or ID...>]"
-interview_depth: none
+context_intake: artifact_only
 ---
 
 ## Pack Availability Guard
 
-Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
 
 # YouTube Format Research
 
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstre
 Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.
 
 1. **Stage 1 - Scope discovery and approval.** Inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` HTML alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled YAML approval of the research scope. Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1.
-2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page with the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
+2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
 3. **Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts.** Consume final compiled YAML for artifact approval only when it has no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths below, and convert the alignment page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
 
 Canonical output paths remain unchanged. Search logs and other supporting evidence remain allowed only where this skill's output contract already requires them.

package/packs/remotion/claude/youtube-format-research/archive/v0.4/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+---
+name: youtube-format-research
+description: Break down a YouTube video's format, visual system, pacing, editing grammar, motion, audio, and Remotion-ready production patterns
+type: research
+version: v0.4
+argument-hint: "<video URL or ID> [--target remotion|script|style-guide] [--compare <video URL or ID...>]"
+interview_depth: none
+---
+
+## Pack Availability Guard
+
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+
+# YouTube Format Research
+
+Invoke as `/youtube-format-research`.
+
+## Report-First Approval Gate
+
+Default to scope-first approval: before synthesized research, inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions in a `review` alignment page plus a concise conversation summary.
+
+Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets or canonical deliverables until final compiled YAML approves the research scope. Minimal pre-approval discovery may identify available files, source categories, and open questions; label it as scope evidence, not findings.
+
+After approved research-scope YAML, perform the research and write only the non-canonical working packet defined in the staged workflow. Then update the `review` alignment page with findings and stop again for feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML artifact approval before creating or updating canonical research, spec, or task files.
+
+Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language. The approval request itself is the next action. Only emit next-skill routing after the approved artifact has been written or updated.
+
+## Staged Research Workflow
+
+Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.
+
+1. **Stage 1 - Scope discovery and approval.** Inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` HTML alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled YAML approval of the research scope. Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1.
+2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page with the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
+3. **Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts.** Consume final compiled YAML for artifact approval only when it has no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths below, and convert the alignment page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+Canonical output paths remain unchanged. Search logs and other supporting evidence remain allowed only where this skill's output contract already requires them.
+
+## Evidence And Feedback Handling
+
+Treat user feedback as input to evaluate, not as automatic ground truth.
+
+- For factual, evidentiary, technical, or source-backed claims: verify against available evidence. If the user appears to misunderstand the evidence or states something factually incorrect, push back clearly and cite the evidence. Do not rewrite findings merely to agree.
+- For taste, brand, positioning preference, risk appetite, prioritization, or other subjective judgment calls: weigh user feedback heavily and adapt the recommendation unless it conflicts with verified evidence.
+- When feedback mixes facts and preference, separate them explicitly: correct the factual part, then incorporate the preference where it is a legitimate judgment call.
+- When uncertain, say what is known, what is inferred, and what would change the conclusion.
+
+## Inputs
+
+- Required: one YouTube video URL or video ID.
+- Optional `--target remotion|script|style-guide`: default `remotion`.
+- Optional `--compare <video URL or ID...>`: additional references to distinguish repeatable format rules from one-off choices.
+
+## Process
+
+1. Resolve all video targets into video IDs from watch URLs, Shorts URLs, youtu.be URLs, embed URLs, or raw 11-character IDs.
+2. Require `yt-dlp` for public metadata:
+
+   ```bash
+   command -v yt-dlp
+   ```
+
+3. Select a transcript Python interpreter. Prefer a workspace-local `.venv`; create it if missing. Install `youtube-transcript-api` into `.venv` only when the import check fails and network access is available.
+4. Persist raw evidence under `research/youtube/data/<video-id>/`:
+   - `metadata-YYYY-MM-DD.json`: raw `yt-dlp --dump-json "VIDEO_URL"` output.
+   - `transcript/<video-id>.json`: raw transcript JSON when available.
+   - `transcript/transcript-summary.json`: transcript text or failure reason.
+5. Inspect available metadata, transcript, chapters, thumbnail URLs, description, and any user-provided screenshots or notes. If visual details cannot be verified from available evidence, mark them as gaps instead of guessing.
+6. Analyze:
+   - Scene grammar: opener, recurring segments, transitions, title cards, examples, proof moments, CTA, outro.
+   - Timing and pacing: section durations, speaking density, cut rhythm, beats, visual resets, and retention support.
+   - Visual system: typography, color, layout, framing, captions, lower thirds, callouts, charts, browser frames, code blocks, or product shots.
+   - Motion language: camera moves, zooms, wipes, kinetic text, object movement, reveal timing, and transition rules.
+   - Audio language: music bed, silence, sound effects, emphasis beats, voiceover style, and mix notes when evidence supports them.
+   - Production assets: required footage, screenshots, diagrams, logos, fonts, icons, stock, B-roll, music, SFX, and licensing checks.
+7. Translate the reference into reusable format rules without copying copyrighted assets or pretending the exact source project is available.
+
+## Output
+
+Create the `research/youtube/` directory if it does not exist.
+
+Write:
+
+```text
+research/youtube/format-research-<video-id>-YYYY-MM-DD.md
+```
+
+Use this structure:
+
+```markdown
+# YouTube Format Research - [Title]
+
+> Video: [URL]
+> Target: remotion / script / style-guide
+> Date captured: YYYY-MM-DD
+> Evidence: [raw paths used]
+
+## Evidence Coverage
+
+| Evidence | Status | Path or gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| Public metadata | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Transcript | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Chapters | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Visual references | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Audio references | Available / Missing | ... |
+
+## Format Summary
+
+[The repeatable format in one concise brief.]
+
+## Scene And Timing Map
+
+| Segment | Approx time | Purpose | Visual treatment | Audio / motion notes |
+|---|---:|---|---|---|
+| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Visual And Motion System
+
+- **Typography**: ...
+- **Color and layout**: ...
+- **Captions / callouts**: ...
+- **Transitions**: ...
+- **Recurring components**: ...
+
+## Production Grammar
+
+[Rules for pacing, proof, examples, visual resets, CTA placement, and when to change scenes.]
+
+## Remotion Handoff
+
+| Component / asset | Role | Inputs | Notes |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Adaptation Guidance
+
+[What to copy as a pattern, what to avoid copying directly, and what to change for the user's brand or series.]
+
+## Evidence Gaps And Human Checks
+
+[Missing screenshots, unavailable fonts, uncertain audio details, licensing checks, or manual review needs.]
+```
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Do not copy or embed copyrighted assets, music, fonts, footage, or thumbnails unless the user confirms licensing.
+- Do not invent visual details that are not evident from metadata, transcript, screenshots, or user-provided notes.
+- Distinguish repeatable format rules from one-off creative choices.
+- Keep Remotion handoff at the component/spec level; actual scaffold and render planning belongs to `/video-build`.
+- Do not bypass login walls, bot protections, access controls, or private YouTube Studio data.
+- Archive existing canonical artifacts before replacing them under `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+
+## Approved Artifact Handoff
+
+After an approved synthesized write, explicit write/update mode, or any direct artifact mutation:
+
+- List every created or updated synthesized artifact path in the final response.
+- State the verification performed, such as readback, schema/check command, or why no executable verification applies for a Markdown-only strategy artifact.
+- Check and report the relevant git status for intended artifacts when the project is a git repository. If intended artifacts are modified or untracked, make the next action shipping, committing, or an explicit dirty-artifact handoff before recommending downstream strategy work.
+- Do not imply the research workflow is complete while approved artifacts remain untracked or uncommitted unless the user explicitly asked not to ship.
+- If stopping for approval before writing, the approval request remains the next action; do not include downstream routing.
+
+## Intent-Aware Routing
+
+Before applying the default `## Next-Skill Routing` sequence, classify the user's immediate intent and route to the missing action that best serves that intent:
+
+- Strategy refresh: recommend the missing or stale positioning, programming, portfolio, metrics, or product-media artifact.
+- Recording prep: recommend the missing series spec, script, build proof, walkthrough guide, or validation artifact needed before recording.
+- Upload prep: recommend packaging, title/thumbnail, description, chapters, or final metadata work before broader strategy work.
+- Performance review: recommend metrics, cadence, portfolio, peer benchmark, or owner-analytics export work before new content planning.
+- Owner analytics or private/manual platform evidence: route to an explicit manual/guide handoff instead of inventing unavailable metrics.
+- Dirty intended artifacts: route to shipping/commit/handoff first, not another creator strategy skill.
+
+Use the default next-skill sequence only when no stronger user intent, missing artifact, manual blocker, or dirty-artifact handoff applies.
+
+## Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/youtube-format-research-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/packs/remotion/claude/youtube-format-research/archive/v0.5/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
+---
+name: youtube-format-research
+description: Break down a YouTube video's format, visual system, pacing, editing grammar, motion, audio, and Remotion-ready production patterns
+type: research
+version: v0.5
+argument-hint: "<video URL or ID> [--target remotion|script|style-guide] [--compare <video URL or ID...>]"
+interview_depth: none
+---
+
+## Pack Availability Guard
+
+Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+
+# YouTube Format Research
+
+Invoke as `/youtube-format-research`.
+
+## Report-First Approval Gate
+
+Default to scope-first approval: before synthesized research, inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions in a `review` alignment page plus a concise conversation summary.
+
+Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets or canonical deliverables until final compiled YAML approves the research scope. Minimal pre-approval discovery may identify available files, source categories, and open questions; label it as scope evidence, not findings.
+
+After approved research-scope YAML, perform the research and write only the non-canonical working packet defined in the staged workflow. Then update the `review` alignment page with findings and stop again for feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML artifact approval before creating or updating canonical research, spec, or task files.
+
+Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language. The approval request itself is the next action. Only emit next-skill routing after the approved artifact has been written or updated.
+
+## Staged Research Workflow
+
+Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.
+
+1. **Stage 1 - Scope discovery and approval.** Inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` HTML alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled YAML approval of the research scope. Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1.
+2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page with the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
+3. **Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts.** Consume final compiled YAML for artifact approval only when it has no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths below, and convert the alignment page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+Canonical output paths remain unchanged. Search logs and other supporting evidence remain allowed only where this skill's output contract already requires them.
+
+## Evidence And Feedback Handling
+
+Treat user feedback as input to evaluate, not as automatic ground truth.
+
+- For factual, evidentiary, technical, or source-backed claims: verify against available evidence. If the user appears to misunderstand the evidence or states something factually incorrect, push back clearly and cite the evidence. Do not rewrite findings merely to agree.
+- For taste, brand, positioning preference, risk appetite, prioritization, or other subjective judgment calls: weigh user feedback heavily and adapt the recommendation unless it conflicts with verified evidence.
+- When feedback mixes facts and preference, separate them explicitly: correct the factual part, then incorporate the preference where it is a legitimate judgment call.
+- When uncertain, say what is known, what is inferred, and what would change the conclusion.
+
+## Inputs
+
+- Required: one YouTube video URL or video ID.
+- Optional `--target remotion|script|style-guide`: default `remotion`.
+- Optional `--compare <video URL or ID...>`: additional references to distinguish repeatable format rules from one-off choices.
+
+## Process
+
+1. Resolve all video targets into video IDs from watch URLs, Shorts URLs, youtu.be URLs, embed URLs, or raw 11-character IDs.
+2. Require `yt-dlp` for public metadata:
+
+   ```bash
+   command -v yt-dlp
+   ```
+
+3. Select a transcript Python interpreter. Prefer a workspace-local `.venv`; create it if missing. Install `youtube-transcript-api` into `.venv` only when the import check fails and network access is available.
+4. Persist raw evidence under `research/youtube/data/<video-id>/`:
+   - `metadata-YYYY-MM-DD.json`: raw `yt-dlp --dump-json "VIDEO_URL"` output.
+   - `transcript/<video-id>.json`: raw transcript JSON when available.
+   - `transcript/transcript-summary.json`: transcript text or failure reason.
+5. Inspect available metadata, transcript, chapters, thumbnail URLs, description, and any user-provided screenshots or notes. If visual details cannot be verified from available evidence, mark them as gaps instead of guessing.
+6. Analyze:
+   - Scene grammar: opener, recurring segments, transitions, title cards, examples, proof moments, CTA, outro.
+   - Timing and pacing: section durations, speaking density, cut rhythm, beats, visual resets, and retention support.
+   - Visual system: typography, color, layout, framing, captions, lower thirds, callouts, charts, browser frames, code blocks, or product shots.
+   - Motion language: camera moves, zooms, wipes, kinetic text, object movement, reveal timing, and transition rules.
+   - Audio language: music bed, silence, sound effects, emphasis beats, voiceover style, and mix notes when evidence supports them.
+   - Production assets: required footage, screenshots, diagrams, logos, fonts, icons, stock, B-roll, music, SFX, and licensing checks.
+7. Translate the reference into reusable format rules without copying copyrighted assets or pretending the exact source project is available.
+
+## Output
+
+Create the `research/youtube/` directory if it does not exist.
+
+Write:
+
+```text
+research/youtube/format-research-<video-id>-YYYY-MM-DD.md
+```
+
+Use this structure:
+
+```markdown
+# YouTube Format Research - [Title]
+
+> Video: [URL]
+> Target: remotion / script / style-guide
+> Date captured: YYYY-MM-DD
+> Evidence: [raw paths used]
+
+## Evidence Coverage
+
+| Evidence | Status | Path or gap |
+|---|---|---|
+| Public metadata | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Transcript | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Chapters | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Visual references | Available / Missing | ... |
+| Audio references | Available / Missing | ... |
+
+## Format Summary
+
+[The repeatable format in one concise brief.]
+
+## Scene And Timing Map
+
+| Segment | Approx time | Purpose | Visual treatment | Audio / motion notes |
+|---|---:|---|---|---|
+| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Visual And Motion System
+
+- **Typography**: ...
+- **Color and layout**: ...
+- **Captions / callouts**: ...
+- **Transitions**: ...
+- **Recurring components**: ...
+
+## Production Grammar
+
+[Rules for pacing, proof, examples, visual resets, CTA placement, and when to change scenes.]
+
+## Remotion Handoff
+
+| Component / asset | Role | Inputs | Notes |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Adaptation Guidance
+
+[What to copy as a pattern, what to avoid copying directly, and what to change for the user's brand or series.]
+
+## Evidence Gaps And Human Checks
+
+[Missing screenshots, unavailable fonts, uncertain audio details, licensing checks, or manual review needs.]
+```
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Do not copy or embed copyrighted assets, music, fonts, footage, or thumbnails unless the user confirms licensing.
+- Do not invent visual details that are not evident from metadata, transcript, screenshots, or user-provided notes.
+- Distinguish repeatable format rules from one-off creative choices.
+- Keep Remotion handoff at the component/spec level; actual scaffold and render planning belongs to `/video-build`.
+- Do not bypass login walls, bot protections, access controls, or private YouTube Studio data.
+- Archive existing canonical artifacts before replacing them under `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
+
+## Approved Artifact Handoff
+
+After an approved synthesized write, explicit write/update mode, or any direct artifact mutation:
+
+- List every created or updated synthesized artifact path in the final response.
+- State the verification performed, such as readback, schema/check command, or why no executable verification applies for a Markdown-only strategy artifact.
+- Check and report the relevant git status for intended artifacts when the project is a git repository. If intended artifacts are modified or untracked, make the next action shipping, committing, or an explicit dirty-artifact handoff before recommending downstream strategy work.
+- Do not imply the research workflow is complete while approved artifacts remain untracked or uncommitted unless the user explicitly asked not to ship.
+- If stopping for approval before writing, the approval request remains the next action; do not include downstream routing.
+
+## Intent-Aware Routing
+
+Before applying the default `## Next-Skill Routing` sequence, classify the user's immediate intent and route to the missing action that best serves that intent:
+
+- Strategy refresh: recommend the missing or stale positioning, programming, portfolio, metrics, or product-media artifact.
+- Recording prep: recommend the missing series spec, script, build proof, walkthrough guide, or validation artifact needed before recording.
+- Upload prep: recommend packaging, title/thumbnail, description, chapters, or final metadata work before broader strategy work.
+- Performance review: recommend metrics, cadence, portfolio, peer benchmark, or owner-analytics export work before new content planning.
+- Owner analytics or private/manual platform evidence: route to an explicit manual/guide handoff instead of inventing unavailable metrics.
+- Dirty intended artifacts: route to shipping/commit/handoff first, not another creator strategy skill.
+
+Use the default next-skill sequence only when no stronger user intent, missing artifact, manual blocker, or dirty-artifact handoff applies.
+
+## Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/youtube-format-research-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.