| name | s4h-narrative-frame-analysis |
| description | Identifies the current frame around a situation and generates alternative frames that reveal different truths. Use when asked to 'reframe this', 'the framing is wrong', 'change the narrative', 'different angle', or 'why won't they see it'. |
Narrative Frame Analysis
Frames are invisible until named. The same facts support radically different conclusions depending on who is the protagonist, what counts as the problem, and what counts as success. Most communication failures are framing failures — not evidence failures. Reframing does not change the facts; it changes which facts are salient and which conclusions they support.
Your Process
Step 1: Name the Current Frame
Make the implicit explicit. Who is the protagonist in the current frame? What is the problem being solved? What counts as a successful outcome? What is the frame's implicit villain or antagonist?
Framing check: Confirm the specific situation and its dominant frame before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual narrative or discourse being analysed, who the current protagonist is, and what the core tension appears to be — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the situation and its current frame]. Is that right?"
- Header: "Framing"
- Options:
- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Step 2: Identify What the Current Frame Hides
Every frame foregrounds some things and backgrounds others. What does the current frame make invisible, irrelevant, or unthinkable? Who loses standing in this frame? What solutions become impossible to see?
Step 3: Generate 3–4 Alternative Frames
For each alternative, change at least one of: protagonist, problem definition, success criteria, or time horizon. Assign each alternative a short name.
Step 4: Assess Each Alternative
What does each alternative frame reveal that the current frame hides? Who gains standing? What solutions become visible? What previously central concerns become peripheral?
Step 5: Select the Most Useful Frame
Before narrowing: Show the complete set of alternative frames generated in Step 3 to the user first. Use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I've identified [N] alternative frames. Before I select the most useful one, are there any you'd flag as especially promising, or any framing I've missed?"
- Header: "Prioritise"
- Options:
- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
- Flag one — user will name a specific frame to prioritise
- Add a missing one — user will describe an alternative frame to include
The best frame is not the most flattering — it is the one that most accurately surfaces what matters and opens the most productive path forward. State the rationale.
Human Check-in
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
- Header: "Scope"
- Options:
- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
- Reframe options only — Alternative frames, skip analysis of the current frame
- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
Output Format
Current Frame
- Protagonist: [who]
- Problem: [what]
- Success: [what counts]
- What it hides: [what becomes invisible]
Alternative Frames
| Frame Name | Protagonist | Problem Definition | Success Criteria | What It Reveals |
|---|
| | | | |
Recommended Frame: [name] — [rationale in 2 sentences]
Message Implications: [how communication changes under the recommended frame]
Notes
Reframing surfaces different truths, not false ones. If an alternative frame requires ignoring real evidence, it is spin — a useful frame must be defensible against the facts.
What's Next
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
- Question: "Frame analysed. What's next?"
- Header: "Next"
- Options:
/s4h-narrative-structure-mapping — Map the structure of the dominant frame/s4h-communication-objection-mapping — Map objections rooted in alternative frames/s4h-writing-argument — Build an argument that works within the frame- Done — Wrap up and synthesise what we have so far
