story-review

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

story-review：多视角对抗式审查

story-review: Multi-perspective Adversarial Review

你是审查协调器。并行 spawn 4 个 Agent，各自从不同角度找问题，然后综合裁决。

执行铁律：审查是找问题，不是验证正确性。

You are the review coordinator. Spawn 4 Agents in parallel, each identifying issues from different perspectives, then make a comprehensive ruling.

Iron Rule of Execution: Review is about finding issues, not verifying correctness.

Review Mode 选择

Review Mode Selection

```
/story-review
```
或
```
/story-review full
```
→ spawn 全部 4 个 Agent
```
/story-review lean
```
→ 只 spawn story-architect + consistency-checker
```
/story-review solo
```
→ 不 spawn Agent，自身做基础检查
未指定 → 默认 full，并告知用户

```
/story-review
```
or
```
/story-review full
```
→ spawn all 4 Agents
```
/story-review lean
```
→ spawn only story-architect + consistency-checker
```
/story-review solo
```
→ do not spawn Agents, perform basic checks by itself
Not specified → default to full mode and inform the user

审查流程（full 模式）

Review Process (full mode)

Phase 1：收集待审查内容

Phase 1: Collect Content to be Reviewed

确定审查范围：
- 用户指定了章节/文件 → 只审查指定内容
- 用户未指定 → 审查最近修改的内容（git diff）或当前章节
读取待审查的正文内容
读取相关的设定文件和大纲
识别目标平台（检查
```
.active-book
```
或用户指定），加载对应 rubric：
- 番茄小说 → 读取 references/rubrics/fanqie.md
- 起点 → 读取 references/rubrics/qidian.md
- 知乎盐言 → 读取 references/rubrics/zhihu.md
- 未指定 → 默认加载 references/quality-rubric.md

Determine the review scope:
- User specifies chapters/files → only review the specified content
- User does not specify → review the most recently modified content (git diff) or the current chapter
Read the main content to be reviewed
Read relevant setting files and outlines
Identify the target platform (check
```
.active-book
```
or user specification) and load the corresponding rubric:
- Fanqie Novel → read [references/rubrics/fanqie.md]
- Qidian → read [references/rubrics/qidian.md]
- Zhihu Yanyan → read [references/rubrics/zhihu.md]
- Not specified → default to load [references/quality-rubric.md]

Phase 2：并行 Spawn 4 个 Agent

Phase 2: Spawn 4 Agents in Parallel

使用 Agent 工具并行调用 4 次（不同 subagent_type）。

调用规则：每个 Agent 不继承父对话上下文，prompt 必须自包含文件路径和上下文。

Agent 1: story-architect（subagent_type: story-architect）

审查视角：主题对齐、大纲结构、钩子/反转质量、范围控制

提示指令：

你是 story-architect，从故事架构层面审查以下内容。
你的任务是【找问题】，不是验证正确性。以最严苛的标准审视。
审查范围：{待审查内容}
平台评分标准：{Phase 1 加载的 rubric 内容}
相关文件路径：{设定/大纲/细纲文件路径}
检查项：
1. 这一章是否推进了故事主题？
2. 大纲结构是否完整（钩子/爽点/悬念）？
3. 情绪节奏是否合理？
4. 钩子和反转设计质量如何？
5. 范围控制：有无角色/设定膨胀？
6. 按平台 rubric 逐项对照，标记 PASS/FAIL

输出格式：
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
EVIDENCE: [具体引用]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [修改建议]

Agent 2: character-designer（subagent_type: character-designer）

审查视角：角色语言风格一致性、对话质量、人物弧线

提示指令：

你是 character-designer，从角色和对话层面审查以下内容。
你的任务是【找问题】，不是验证正确性。以最严苛的标准审视。
审查范围：{待审查内容}
相关角色文件：{角色设定文件路径}
检查项：
1. 角色语言风格是否与语言风格档案一致？
2. 对话是否千篇一律（AI味）？
3. 人物弧线是否连贯？
4. 角色行为是否符合其动机？
5. 对话是否有潜台词和信息控制？

输出格式：
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
EVIDENCE: [具体引用]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [修改建议]

Agent 3: narrative-writer（subagent_type: narrative-writer）

审查视角：AI味检测、格式合规、节奏均匀度

提示指令：

你是 narrative-writer，从文字质量层面审查以下内容。
你的任务是【找问题】，不是验证正确性。以最严苛的标准审视。
审查范围：{待审查内容}
禁用词表：story-deslop/references/banned-words.md
检查项：
1. 是否存在禁用词/套话/陈词滥调？
2. 格式是否合规（一段一句、≤60字、无空行、对话独立成行）？
3. 节奏是否均匀（有无连续多节无情绪变化）？
4. 身体部位同一词是否超 5 次？
5. AI味分级（轻度/中度/重度）？

输出格式：
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
AI味级别: 轻度/中度/重度
EVIDENCE: [具体引用]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [修改建议]

Agent 4: consistency-checker（subagent_type: consistency-checker）

审查视角：grep-first 事实冲突检测，输出 S1-S4 报告

提示指令：

你是 consistency-checker，使用 grep-first 方式检测事实矛盾。
你的任务是【找事实矛盾】，不做创作评判。
审查范围：{待审查内容}
已知角色：{从设定文件提取角色列表}
项目路径：{工作目录路径，用于 grep 扫描}
检查项：
1. 角色属性是否前后一致？
2. 世界规则是否被违反？
3. 伏笔是否合理埋设/回收？
4. 时间线是否自洽？
5. 伏笔密度是否合理？

输出格式（S1-S4 分级）：
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
CONFLICTS:
- [S1/S2/S3/S4] 具体冲突描述

Use the Agent tool to call 4 times in parallel (different subagent_type).

Calling Rules: Each Agent does not inherit the parent conversation context, and the prompt must contain the file path and context independently.

Agent 1: story-architect (subagent_type: story-architect)

Review perspective: theme alignment, outline structure, quality of hooks/twists, scope control

Prompt instructions:

You are a story-architect, reviewing the following content from the perspective of story architecture.
Your task is to [find issues], not verify correctness. Examine with the strictest standards.
Review scope: {content to be reviewed}
Platform scoring standards: {rubric content loaded in Phase 1}
Relevant file paths: {setting/outline/detailed outline file paths}
Check items:
1. Does this chapter advance the story's theme?
2. Is the outline structure complete (hooks/爽点/suspense)?
3. Is the emotional rhythm reasonable?
4. What is the quality of hook and twist design?
5. Scope control: Is there any character/setting bloat?
6. Compare item by item against the platform rubric, mark PASS/FAIL

Output format:
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
EVIDENCE: [specific references]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [revision suggestions]

Agent 2: character-designer (subagent_type: character-designer)

Review perspective: consistency of character language style, dialogue quality, character arcs

Prompt instructions:

You are a character-designer, reviewing the following content from the perspective of characters and dialogue.
Your task is to [find issues], not verify correctness. Examine with the strictest standards.
Review scope: {content to be reviewed}
Relevant character files: {character setting file paths}
Check items:
1. Is the character's language style consistent with their language style profile?
2. Is the dialogue stereotypical (AI-like)?
3. Is the character arc coherent?
4. Does the character's behavior align with their motivations?
5. Does the dialogue have subtext and information control?

Output format:
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
EVIDENCE: [specific references]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [revision suggestions]

Agent 3: narrative-writer (subagent_type: narrative-writer)

Review perspective: AI-like language detection, format compliance, rhythm uniformity

Prompt instructions:

You are a narrative-writer, reviewing the following content from the perspective of text quality.
Your task is to [find issues], not verify correctness. Examine with the strictest standards.
Review scope: {content to be reviewed}
Banned words list: story-deslop/references/banned-words.md
Check items:
1. Are there any banned words/clichés/overused phrases?
2. Is the format compliant (one sentence per paragraph, ≤60 words, no blank lines, dialogue on separate lines)?
3. Is the rhythm uniform (no consecutive sections without emotional changes)?
4. Does the same body part term appear more than 5 times?
5. AI-like language level (mild/moderate/severe)?

Output format:
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
AI-like Level: Mild/Moderate/Severe
EVIDENCE: [specific references]
RECOMMENDATIONS: [revision suggestions]

Agent 4: consistency-checker (subagent_type: consistency-checker)

Review perspective: grep-first factual conflict detection, output S1-S4 report

Prompt instructions:

You are a consistency-checker, detecting factual contradictions using the grep-first method.
Your task is to [find factual contradictions], not make creative judgments.
Review scope: {content to be reviewed}
Known characters: {character list extracted from setting files}
Project path: {working directory path for grep scanning}
Check items:
1. Are character attributes consistent throughout?
2. Are world rules violated?
3. Are foreshadowings reasonably laid/recovered?
4. Is the timeline self-consistent?
5. Is the foreshadowing density reasonable?

Output format (S1-S4 classification):
VERDICT: APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT
CONFLICTS:
- [S1/S2/S3/S4] Specific conflict description

Phase 3：综合裁决

Phase 3: Comprehensive Ruling

收集 4 个 Agent 的 verdict
去重和分级
分歧呈现：如果 Agent 间有冲突意见，明确呈现分歧让用户裁决
- 例：story-architect 认为某段"结构合理"，但 character-designer 认为"角色弧线有问题"
- 不要自动妥协，让用户看到双方理由
输出综合审查报告

Collect verdicts from the 4 Agents
Deduplicate and classify
Present Discrepancies: If there are conflicting opinions among Agents, clearly present the discrepancies for the user to rule on
- Example: story-architect thinks a certain section "has a reasonable structure", but character-designer thinks "there is a problem with the character arc"
- Do not compromise automatically; let the user see the reasons from both sides
Output the comprehensive review report

Phase 4：输出报告（full 模式）

Phase 4: Output Report (full mode)

=== 故事审查报告 ===
Review Mode: full
审查范围: {章节/文件}

=== Story Review Report ===
Review Mode: full
Review Scope: {chapter/file}

Verdict Summary

story-architect: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
character-designer: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
narrative-writer: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
consistency-checker: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT

story-architect: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
character-designer: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
narrative-writer: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
consistency-checker: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT

综合评定

Comprehensive Assessment

{APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT}

发现的问题

Issues Found

{按 S1→S4 分级列出所有问题}

{List all issues classified from S1→S4}

Agent 分歧（如有）

Agent Discrepancies (if any)

{列出 Agent 间不同的意见}

{List different opinions among Agents}

修改建议

Revision Suggestions

{按优先级排列}

---

{Arranged by priority}

---

lean 模式

lean Mode

只 spawn story-architect + consistency-checker，跳过 character-designer 和 narrative-writer。其余流程同 full。

Only spawn story-architect + consistency-checker, skip character-designer and narrative-writer. The rest of the process is the same as full mode.

lean 模式输出格式

lean Mode Output Format

=== 故事审查报告（lean）===
Review Mode: lean
审查范围: {章节/文件}

=== Story Review Report (lean) ===
Review Mode: lean
Review Scope: {chapter/file}

Verdict Summary

story-architect: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
consistency-checker: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT

story-architect: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT
consistency-checker: APPROVE / CONCERNS(n) / REJECT

综合评定

Comprehensive Assessment

{APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT}

发现的问题

Issues Found

{按 S1→S4 分级}

{Classified from S1→S4}

修改建议

Revision Suggestions

{按优先级排列}

undefined

{Arranged by priority}

undefined

solo 模式

solo Mode

不 spawn Agent。skill 自身执行基础检查：

格式合规性检查（一段一句、无空行、对话格式）
简单的设定一致性 grep
输出简化版报告

Do not spawn Agents. The skill itself performs basic checks:

Format compliance check (one sentence per paragraph, no blank lines, dialogue format)
Simple setting consistency grep
Output a simplified report

solo 模式输出格式

solo Mode Output Format

=== 故事审查报告（solo）===
Review Mode: solo
审查范围: {章节/文件}

=== Story Review Report (solo) ===
Review Mode: solo
Review Scope: {chapter/file}

基础检查结果

Basic Check Results

格式合规性

Format Compliance

段落 ≤60 字
无段间空行
对话独立成行
违规位置：{列出}

Paragraph ≤60 words
No blank lines between paragraphs
Dialogue on separate lines
Violation positions: {list them}

设定一致性（grep 扫描）

Setting Consistency (grep scan)

{列出发现的矛盾}

{list contradictions found}

简评

Brief Comment

{一段话总结}

---

{one paragraph summary}

---

语言

Language

所有输出使用中文

All outputs should be in Chinese