Files
movq 6e4edc09d1 refactor(fiction-assistance)!: reduce to portable guidance and analysis (v2.0.0)
Strip the Universalis-specific vault layout and card-management
machinery. The plugin is now a general-purpose fiction toolkit:
nine commands that take a manuscript path/glob/selection via
\$ARGUMENTS and write their output to the conversation.

Surviving commands, flattened into commands/:
- analyze-story: structural and statistical analysis
- bechdel-test: representation tests (Bechdel + related)
- check-continuity: plot/character/world continuity
- check-voice: per-character voice consistency
- developmental-review: structural feedback on a scene/chapter
- extract-research: world-building and research inventory
- final-review: synthesis of prior-phase reviews
- generate-timeline: chronology with consistency checks
- strategic-review: craft-based critique with priority ranking

Removed (vault and card management): 10 update-*-cards commands,
cleanup-generated, update-changed, update-links,
update-chapter-summaries, validate-story, validate-pdf, score-scenes.
The original bespoke command set is preserved in 65c29d7 for recovery.

Agent (line-editor) and skill (reviewing-fiction) were already
portable and are unchanged. plugin.json no longer needs the
commands subdirectory paths since the layout is flat. Marketplace
description updated to reflect the general-purpose scope.

BREAKING CHANGE: All update-*-cards, cleanup-generated, update-changed,
update-links, update-chapter-summaries, validate-story, validate-pdf,
and score-scenes commands are removed. perform-bechdel-tests is renamed
to bechdel-test. review-final is renamed to final-review.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-16 18:28:53 -05:00

1.6 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

description, argument-hint, allowed-tools
description argument-hint allowed-tools
Synthesize prior phase reviews into a final manuscript assessment [path to manuscript and/or prior review notes]
Read
Glob
Grep

Using whatever prior-phase review notes the user provides (or that exist in the working directory under names like review-*.md, notes/review/, etc.), produce a final, integrated assessment of the manuscript at $ARGUMENTS.

Story architecture

  1. Inciting incident — clear, compelling, well-placed?
  2. Plot points — major turning points obvious and impactful?
  3. Climax — does it feel earned and satisfying?
  4. Resolution — does it resolve the key conflicts appropriately?

Integration analysis

  1. Scene flow — do scenes connect logically and maintain momentum?
  2. Pacing rhythm — variation between fast and slow?
  3. Character arc completion — do characters grow consistently?
  4. Setting consistency — locations and time periods coherent?
  5. Theme reinforcement — do plot, character, and setting support the central themes?

Structural recommendations

  • Scenes to add, remove, or combine
  • Pacing adjustments
  • Character development gaps
  • Setting opportunities
  • Overall readability improvements

Final assessment

  • The manuscript's greatest strengths
  • Top 35 areas needing improvement
  • Concrete action steps for revision
  • Overall readiness assessment for the writer's intended market

Present the synthesis directly in the conversation. Quote specifically from prior reviews and from the manuscript to support each point — name the chapter/scene and the issue. The goal is a revision roadmap the writer can act on.