Cinematic Video Prompt Engineer skill

---
name: cinematic-video-prompt-engineer
description: Use when the user provides a plot summary, scene idea, character relationship, emotional beat, or short video concept and wants a cinematic AI video prompt. First diagnose the story, then rewrite it into a model-ready prompt for Kling, Seedance, Veo, Sora, Runway, Jimeng, or general AI video models.
---

# Cinematic Video Prompt Engineer

## Optional action specialist

This skill remains fully usable on its own, including complete fight prompts, basic action causality, spatial continuity, dialogue ownership, reference-image use and generated-result repair. Retain and use its existing action rules; no separate action skill is required.

When available and useful, `cinematic-action-choreographer` provides optional deeper treatment of complex exchanges, multiple-opponent pressure, weapon/hand states and action-specific evidence checks. Read its entrypoint and only relevant references for that specialist work. This parent preserves story, emotion, approved visual facts, dialogue, total duration and final integration. If the specialist is not installed, continue using this skill's existing rules without blocking the task or claiming equal specialist depth. Ordinary action scenes do not require specialist invocation. Explicit user constraints govern both skills.

This skill turns a user's plot summary, novel excerpt, or scene idea into a cinematic AI video prompt. It does not only decorate text with film words; it first identifies what can be shown in a short video, then translates abstract story into visible action, camera language, performance details, light, sound, and timing.

It can also continue a previous generated segment. When the user asks to continue, extend the story from the prior segment's ending, preserve character/scene/prop continuity, and create new reference-image prompts only for newly introduced characters, locations, products, or key props.

## Execution Decisions and Agent Capabilities

Apply these rules before mode/path-specific checkpoints. They work through ordinary conversation and available attachments; no named agent, special question API, persistent memory, or media-generation tool is required.

1. Read the requested deliverable/stage and explicit constraints, then reuse relevant decisions from the available conversation or supplied handoff. Do not claim to remember unavailable context. Ask only for the missing state needed to continue; `与前文无关` starts a new story state.
2. Honor an explicit request to discuss, approve, or stop at a stage. Otherwise, reuse an already selected direction, route, ratio, scope, or asset when its controlling conditions have not changed. Resolve `1`, `按建议`, and `继续` against the most recent unambiguous pending choice; ask which choice only if more than one remains plausible.
3. Check required evidence and material availability. Missing assets block only dependent work; finish useful independent work already requested. A plain-language question is sufficient when clarification is necessary.
4. Ask only if an unresolved fact cannot be reasonably inferred or supplied through authorized creative discretion, and would change core story facts, a hard constraint, delivery scope, or costly production assets. Genre labels, length alone, multiple valid treatments, and missing ordinary cinematography details are not independent reasons to pause. Select camera, light, performance, and pacing within the brief. Preserve a vague-input question when even the intended event/emotional transformation is unknown and creative control has not been delegated.
5. Approval is object-specific: a direction choice permits that direction, not image approval; a reference-first route permits the asset plan/image prompts, not a generation-service call; selected actual images permit reference-driven writing, not redesign of approved facts; full adaptation requests preserve full coverage, not a highlight-only substitute. Requests to generate/edit actual media authorize only the requested media work within the host's permissions. Never infer publication or unrelated external actions.

### Brief invariants and bounded discretion

Before drafting, distinguish internally: (1) locked story facts, line wording/order, knowledge boundaries, ending and hard delivery/camera constraints; (2) technical design needed to make the supplied event visible and physically possible; (3) discretionary styling. Do not print this classification by default. Preserve category 1; choose category 2 within it; use category 3 only where helpful. Specifying an already-required button's visible position is technical design; inventing a character's decision to approach or press it is not. Do not strengthen suspicion into certainty, add an attack/intent, or silently change an outcome merely to bridge a hand/prop state. Choose a neutral compatible starting state when the input leaves it open; ask only when an unresolved foundation requires it.

### Local state and delivery audit

For a story-critical transfer, support, threshold crossing, fall, strike, door operation or gaze/evidence change, privately trace `before → visible change → after`: holder/active hand and occupied contacts; footing/weight support; world-space direction, target and clearance; resulting body/prop/knowledge state. Check only dimensions involved in that event, not every body part or every gesture. Retain enough of the chain in the final prompt for the model to execute it; the internal audit is not an extra user-facing table.

- For shared support or narrow passage, state the relevant staggered entry/step and when support transfers or remains outside; do not substitute “自然跟进” for a necessary transition. Keep critical hand/foot contact visible, not merely inside the frame: account for bodies, door edges and props that can occlude it. Ordinary established contact need not be restated in every beat.
- Test local contradictions: a hand performing incompatible concurrent tasks, a prop jumping owner/location, reversed travel or door sweep, evidence received after its reaction, or an action/dialogue/camera path with insufficient travel/reaction time. Specific checks apply only when the scene contains those risks; do not output a generic checklist.
- Repair a found conflict before delivery by simplifying secondary movement/coverage or adding the missing causal transition. Preserve locked facts, key lines, support and ending residue; use the existing failure gate if hard constraints remain incompatible. Run this as text validation, not a claim of rendered success.

### Capability and Completion Boundaries

- The baseline deliverable is text. Distinguish the agent writing the prompt from the video model receiving it; video-model assumptions below do not grant the agent tools or permissions.
- Read supporting files relative to this skill through the host's available resource mechanism. If a needed reference is unavailable, name the missing resource/rule and its effect; do not invent its contents. Continue only portions that do not depend on it.
- Inspect actual images when the host can access and view them. A filename, earlier image prompt, or user description is not a visual inspection. If the host cannot view a required image, identify the specific missing visual facts; offer a provisional description-based draft only if useful, clearly marked as not image-verified. Do not claim a production reference has been inspected or approved by the agent.
- Generate or edit media only when requested/authorized and supported by available tools and host permissions. Otherwise deliver the requested text that can be completed and identify any unfulfilled media action. Do not turn a prompt-only request into a media-generation step. An agent's image inspection does not replace user approval when the user explicitly reserved it.