image-prompt

Original：🇺🇸 English

Translated

Use as the foundation and router for any image a post needs — turn a social need into a clear image brief, describe it with model-agnostic prompt craft, and route to the right tool. Run when the user says "I need a visual/image for this post," "what image should I use," "make a graphic," "help me prompt an image," or is unsure which image tool/model to use. Reads brand-profile for the visual brand. Teaches the image brief, the universal anatomy of a strong prompt in natural language, and a tool router (typographic -> ideogram/nano-banana; photoreal -> nano-banana/flux; surreal -> Midjourney; editing -> nano-banana/flux; vector -> Recraft; video -> veo-3). Includes a "should this even be AI-generated?" gate (a real photo, screenshot, or chart often beats generic AI), accessibility, and honest scope (disclose AI, never real identifiable people or copyrighted IP, verify text/data). Hands off to the tool-specific mini-skills; WoopSocial publishes via Media and doesn't generate images.

4installs

Sourcesocial-media-skills/skills

Added on2026-10-01

NPX Install

npx skill4agent add social-media-skills/skills image-prompt

SKILL.md Content

View Translation Comparison →

Image Prompt (brief · craft · router)

The foundation of the visual cluster. When a post needs an image, this skill decides what image (the brief), describes it with model-agnostic craft, and routes to the right tool — then hands off. It sits above the tool-specific mini-skills (

nano-banana

,

ideogram

,

flux

,

veo-3

), which own their model's specific tricks.

Think of it as the visual equivalent of

brand-profile

/

content-pillars

: the shared decision layer the tool skills assume you've already worked through.

Step 0 — Gate: should this even be AI-generated?

AI generation is one option, not the default. A real photo (your actual product/space/team), a screenshot, UGC, or a chart often wins on authenticity and clarity — and AI must never fabricate your real people/place. Reach for generation when you need something that doesn't exist, must match a brand look, needs legible in-image text, or a consistent series — and no real asset fits. If a real asset is better, say so. (See

references/the-image-brief.md

.)

Step 1 — Write the brief

Read

brand-profile.md

, then answer four things: job/purpose (hero / explainer / quote graphic / product / lifestyle / thumbnail / background / ad), the one thing it must convey, format/aspect ratio for the destination, and the brand look. Output a one-line brief. See

references/the-image-brief.md

.

Step 2 — Describe it (model-agnostic)

Turn the brief into a specific, natural-language prompt — subject · composition · lighting · colour · style · mood · detail · constraints — and drop quality-token spam ("4k, masterpiece"). Specificity beats length; design for any text overlay (negative space, contrast). See

references/prompt-anatomy.md

.

Step 3 — Route to the tool

Pick by the image's dominant requirement:

Text / typographic →
```
ideogram
```
or
```
nano-banana
```
(both strong — honest pick by tooling).
Photoreal portrait/product →
```
nano-banana
```
or
```
flux
```
(Midjourney external). Surreal/painterly → Midjourney.
Editing ("change one thing, keep the rest") →
```
nano-banana
```
(conversational) or
```
flux
```
(Kontext).
Consistent character/product set →
```
nano-banana
```
(multi-image references) or
```
flux
```
(multi-reference).
Search-grounded infographics →
```
nano-banana
```
. Brand-exact hex / open weights / license control →
```
flux
```
.
Vector/SVG → Recraft. Video →
```
veo-3
```
.

When two fit, say both work and pick by the deciding factor — don't fake a winner. See

references/choosing-the-tool.md

.

Step 4 — Hand off, then ship

Hand off to the tool's mini-skill for model-specific craft (and

tools/integrations/<tool>.md

for the API). After generation: verify in-image text/data, disclose AI per platform/region, then upload to WoopSocial Media → attach via

scheduling-and-queue

. WoopSocial publishes; it doesn't generate.

Cross-cutting (always)

Disclose AI per platform/region (Meta "Made with AI", EU AI Act). Watermark behaviour varies by tool (SynthID on Google tools; none enforced on Ideogram) — don't rely on it for disclosure.
No real people / no IP — no real identifiable individuals, copyrighted characters, or trademarked logos; original directions only.
Verify in-image text and data before publishing.
Accessibility — contrast + legibility on mobile; leave room for overlays.

Quality bar — self-check

Did I gate (real asset vs AI) before generating?
Did I write a brief (job + the one thing + format + brand) and a specific, natural-language prompt (no token spam)?
Did I route by the dominant requirement with an honest which-tool read, and hand off?
Did I design for overlays/accessibility, and cover disclosure, IP, and verification?
Did I keep WoopSocial honest (publishes via Media; doesn't generate)?

Edge cases & pushback

"Just write a cool image prompt" → build the brief first; purpose before prompt.
"4k masterpiece ultra-detailed" → rewrite into a specific scene; drop quality tokens.
"Generate my real cafe/staff" → use a real photo; don't fabricate real people/place.
"Base it on [studio]'s characters" / a real person → refuse IP/real people; original direction.
"Which model — A or B?" → honest, tooling-based answer; both can be right.
"Generate it in WoopSocial" → WoopSocial doesn't generate; route to a tool, then upload + attach.

References

```
references/the-image-brief.md
```
— the "should this be AI?" gate and the four-question brief.
```
references/prompt-anatomy.md
```
— the universal, model-agnostic anatomy of a strong prompt.
```
references/choosing-the-tool.md
```
— the router/decision tree and honest which-tool calls.
```
references/examples.md
```
— end-to-end flows, weak→strong, the don't-generate gate, and honest scope.