Generate high-quality videos through iterative test-time refinement: agents critique outputs on visual/audio/context fidelity and a reasoning agent synthesizes feedback to improve prompts across multiple generations.
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
Generate high-quality videos through iterative test-time refinement: agents critique outputs on visual/audio/context fidelity and a reasoning agent synthesizes feedback to improve prompts across multiple generations.
Technique: Test-Time Self-Improving Video Agent — Iterative Refinement Without Retraining
Video generation quality depends critically on precise prompt engineering, but most users struggle to write optimal prompts on the first try. VISTA addresses this by creating a multi-agent system that runs autonomously at test time, iteratively refining prompts based on synthetic critique until reaching high-quality outputs.
Rather than requiring user feedback or external training, VISTA uses specialized agent critique on three quality dimensions—visual fidelity, audio coherence, and contextual alignment—then synthesizes this feedback into improved prompts. This enables quality improvement without retraining the base video model.
Core Concept
VISTA operates through a closed-loop refinement cycle:
Temporal Planning: Convert user idea into structured temporal structure
Generation & Selection: Generate candidate videos, identify best via pairwise tournament
Multi-Agent Critique: Three agents (visual, audio, context) evaluate independently
Prompt Synthesis: Reasoning agent integrates critiques and rewrites prompts
Iterative Cycles: Repeat until convergence or quality threshold
The system achieves 60% win rate against baselines and 66.4% human preference rate by working entirely at test time without model fine-tuning.
Architecture Overview
Prompt Encoder: Convert user input and feedback into structured temporal plans
Video Generator: Off-the-shelf text-to-video model (e.g., OpenAI Sora, Runway)
Selection Tournament: Pairwise comparisons to rank generated videos
Visual Agent: Evaluates scene composition, object clarity, visual coherence
Reasoning Agent: Aggregates all critiques and generates improved prompts
Iteration Controller: Decides when to stop (quality reached or budget exhausted)
Implementation Steps
The core loop generates videos, collects critique, and synthesizes improved prompts. This example shows how to implement the critique-synthesis pipeline.
"""
Evaluate video on three dimensions independently.
Returns structured critique for each agent.
"""
# Visual critique: scene composition, clarity, consistency
self
"Evaluate this video's visual quality. Check: scene composition, "
"object clarity, visual consistency across frames, color grading, "
"lighting coherence. Rate each 1-5 and highlight issues."
# Audio critique: sync, quality, speech
self
"Evaluate audio quality: Are sounds synchronized with visuals? "
"Is speech clear? Is music/ambient sound appropriate? "
"Rate audio-visual sync 1-5. List specific issues."
# Context critique: narrative, temporal flow
self
"Analyze narrative coherence: Does the video follow the prompt? "
"Is temporal flow logical? Are characters/objects consistent? "
"Rate narrative alignment 1-5. List inconsistencies."
return
"visual"
"audio"
"context"
def
synthesize_feedback
self,
critiques: Dict,
current_prompt: str,
iteration: int
str
"""
Aggregate multi-agent critiques and generate improved prompt.
"""
f"""
You are a video prompt engineer synthesizing feedback from three specialists.
Current Prompt: {current_prompt}
Iteration: {iteration}
Visual Feedback:
{json.dumps(critiques['visual'], indent=2)}
Audio Feedback:
{json.dumps(critiques['audio'], indent=2)}
Context Feedback:
{json.dumps(critiques['context'], indent=2)}
Based on this feedback, generate an improved prompt that:
1. Preserves the core intent
2. Addresses the top visual issues
3. Improves audio coherence
4. Strengthens narrative alignment
5. Is specific and actionable
Return only the improved prompt, no explanation.
"""
self
return
def
self_improving_video_generation
user_prompt: str,
video_generator,
critique_system: VideoAgentCritique,
max_iterations: int = 3,
quality_threshold: float = 4.2# Out of 5
"""
Generate video and iteratively improve via multi-agent critique.
"""
None
0.0
for
in
range
# Generate video candidates
for
in
range
2
# Generate 2 candidates per iteration
# Select best via pairwise tournament
# Evaluate quality
if
# Check convergence
if
print
f"Quality threshold reached at iteration {iteration}"
The key insight is that critique doesn't require perfect agents—even simple LLM-based evaluators can identify genuine improvements. Three independent critiques provide redundancy; if two agents agree on an issue, the synthesis agent prioritizes it.
Practical Guidance
Video Type
Iterations
Expected Improvement
Simple scene
1-2
+15-25% quality
Complex narrative
2-3
+25-40% quality
Multi-shot cinematic
3-4
+30-50% quality
When to Use:
Generating videos for which high quality matters (marketing, content)
You can tolerate 2-3× generation cost for better results
Base video model is already reasonably capable
You have specialized agents (visual, audio, context) available
When NOT to Use:
Real-time video generation (iterations take seconds/minutes)
Base video model is poor (iteration can't fix fundamental limitations)
Cost per generation is prohibitive (test-time refinement multiplies cost)
Prompt is already well-specified (diminishing returns)
Common Pitfalls:
Critique agents too harsh or lenient → biases refinement (calibrate on validation set)
Synthesis agent stuck in local optima → add random perturbations to prompts occasionally
Not tracking best video separately → always use best_score, not latest_score for quality assessment
Over-iterating → set quality threshold and early stopping condition
Specialized agents lack proper context → provide full video frames + previous critique history
