Use when writing per-cue teacher narration and captions for a Remotion lesson. The narration is COMMENTARY ON THE VISUAL — Wave 2a's per-cue motion budget is the input, and you write narration to fit each cue's budget. No invented hold timings.
Instalar com Codex ou Claude Copie este prompt, cole no Codex, Claude ou outro assistente e deixe que ele revise a página da skill e instale para você.
Um comando direto ignora o prompt de revisão. Verifique a origem antes de executá-lo.
Instruções da origem · Visualização somente leitura
name
lesson-audio-captions
description
Use when writing per-cue teacher narration and captions for a Remotion lesson. The narration is COMMENTARY ON THE VISUAL — Wave 2a's per-cue motion budget is the input, and you write narration to fit each cue's budget. No invented hold timings.
Lesson Audio Captions
Narration is the teacher's voice over the visual. The visual is the teaching tool; words are commentary. This skill turns the Visual Contract's per-cue motion budgets into narration text the TTS generator can speak.
See docs/pipeline-architecture.md for the full rationale.
Inputs
lesson-data/<id>/pedagogy.md — per-cue discovery sentences (read-only). Every line of narration must respect §4 narration-leakage.
lesson-data/<id>/script-cues.json — machine-readable CuePlan that drives Wave 3a's voice generation. One row per cue: id, narration, phrase, caption, optional emphasis, optional gap.
The targeting rule
For each cue, the Visual Contract declares visualMotionSeconds. Write narration that, when spoken at the calibrated voice rate, lands within ±20% of that value.
Calibration: for Aoede Mandarin slow pacing, the empirical rate is roughly 0.28–0.32s per Chinese character (NOT 0.42s/char — that estimate was wrong, see kp1-fen-yu-he-intro post-mortem). 4s of visual motion ≈ 13–14 characters of narration. Use this as a starting point. For a mixed L1+L2 line, the embedded L2 words add their own spoken time (a 1–2 syllable English word ≈ 0.4–0.7s) — count them on top of the Chinese-char estimate. If the lesson uses a different voice or language, calibrate by generating one short clip and measuring. These are LENGTH hints only; the real cue window is Wave 3.5's.
Narration-leakage rule (pedagogy §4)
Narrator NAMES the action or the unit; the picture DELIVERS the count. Never write a line that announces what the visual is supposed to make the child notice.
Bad: "There are three bundles." (the picture shows three bundles arriving — the count was given before the child counted)
Good: "再加一捆。" (the narrator names the action; the picture delivers count 3 by the bundle's arrival)
If you cannot write narration that respects this rule for a cue, the visual is doing the wrong thing — flag back to Wave 2a, do not paper over.
Language / L2 carve-out (pedagogy §4 / §9). When the discovery IS an utterance the child must acquire — an English word, a sound, a tone — the narration MUST voice that target. Saying "Hello" / "I'm Sam" / "Goodbye" is the teaching act, not leakage: the child learns the sound by hearing it. The leakage rule still applies to everything that is not the target (don't narrate a count or a relation the picture reveals). Concretely, for a language lesson it is correct — and required — to write mixed lines like 看，他们见面，打招呼：Hello！ (Chinese frames the moment, the L2 word is the target). This is the natural shape; do not Chinese-only it.
Every narration line is a complete, grammatical utterance
A narration line is one whole sentence a fluent speaker of that language would actually say aloud — correct word order, with every term the line is about present. Naming the target is necessary but NOT sufficient: the LINE must stand on its own, not a stranded token with a dangling verb that leans on the picture to finish it.
The defect (language-agnostic): a beat that teaches a RELATION — a part–whole bond, a transformation, a comparison, a question→answer, a greeting→reply — voiced as a stranded fragment that drops a term the relation BINDS. A relation binds two-or-more terms (e.g. a whole and its parts; a before and an after; two quantities being compared; a prompt and its response). Speaking only some of those terms with the binding verb left dangling is the broken-fragment defect — the same class as a leak, in the opposite direction. State the relation as the FULL utterance that names every term it binds, in the direction(s) the beat teaches; never the bare term(s) with the relation stranded.
Concrete illustration (this lesson is 分与合, a part–whole bond — read these as e.g., not as the rule):
Decompose direction — name the whole being split: 六可以分成一和五。 ✅ — not 一和五，分成。 ❌ (the whole 六 dropped, 分成 left dangling).
Recombine / conserve direction — name the recombined whole: 一和五合起来是六。 ✅ — not 一和五，合起来。 ❌ (the conserved whole 六 dropped).
Retrieve / recap — each item is a full utterance, or the set framed by what binds it: 六可以分成一和五、二和四、三和三。 ✅ — not the bare list 一和五。二和四。三和三。 ❌.
(For other relation kinds the same shape holds: a comparison says the full claim 六比五多一 ✅, not a stranded 多一 ❌; an L2 greeting beat says the whole utterance Hello! / 跟我说：Hello, where the lone word IS the complete utterance.)
The lone-word carve-out above is the special case where the target IS a complete utterance on its own ("Hello"); a relation is not — speaking its terms without the whole it binds is the broken-fragment defect. If pedagogy/storyboard already state the relation as a complete utterance, carry it verbatim; never compress it to the bare terms to save characters. "Carry it verbatim; never compress" means never DROP a term the relation binds to save chars — it does NOT mean the terse template IS the target. A complete-but-flat line is not finished: the finalized line must still pass ## Register below.
Read-aloud self-check (every cue, before you finalize): read each narration line out loud as if you were the teacher. If it is not a sentence a person would actually say — a fragment, a dangling verb, a missing term the relation binds, scrambled order — it is broken; rewrite it complete. A line that only passes because the picture "fills in" the missing term still fails: the spoken line itself must stand. The same read-aloud now confirms BOTH completeness AND register: that it sounds like a warm teacher speaking to a child, not a label being read — and that no single sentence-template is stamped across multiple cues (see ## Register below).
Place a syncable target at the HEAD of its cue, never buried at the tail. The composer can only anchor a target's visual reveal (the gesture or swell that fires on the word) to cue.startFrame + a small offset, and the bilingual ASR timestamps only the carrier-language tokens, not an embedded L2 target — so the target's true spoken onset is invisible to the timeline. If a target sits at the END of its cue's line — schematically <carrier framing>：<TARGET>, where the carrier runs several seconds first — the picture fires the reveal seconds before the mouth says it (the desync a viewer notices). So when a cue's target must land on its animation: lead the cue's narration with the target (the L2 word inside the first ~0.5s, any framing/gloss after), or give the target its OWN short cue (the carrier framing becomes a separate preceding beat). Keep a syncable target's spoken onset within ~0.5s of its cue start. A long carrier sentence + a tail-buried target in one cue IS the desync bug — split it (this pairs with the storyboard giving such a target its own cue, like an echo cue). A pure-framing carrier line with no target to land can sit anywhere; only the target's onset is load-bearing.
Register — the teacher's voice
Completeness is necessary but NOT sufficient. A line that is complete + on-budget but flat is not done. Narration must sound like a warm teacher speaking TO a 4–6-year-old, not a label being read aloud. The robotic stamp — same sentence frame repeated across cues, 书面语 stiffness, a procedure announced at the content instead of an invitation to the child — is a NAMED defect this section exists to kill.
Persona. Default = a warm, encouraging teacher voice: second person, gentle, talking to one small child. A lesson MAY override the persona via a brief-level **Teacher.** field (mirrors how **Style.** works); absent that field, use the warm default. The persona is a MANNER, never a script — it is topic-agnostic and reused verbatim across every lesson.
The five register laws (general rule + a tiny SHAPE illustration — never a copyable line):
Speak TO the child, not AT the content. Direct address — lead with an invitation or a look-hook (shape: 我们一起… / 你看… / 猜猜看…), not a third-person statement of fact.
Hand the thinking over with a guiding question at least once per teaching arc — elicit, don't only declare (shape: 你发现了什么？ / 你是怎么知道的？ / 谁来告诉我？).
State the reverse / the insight in your OWN warm words — a small discovery, never a cloned mirror clause of the forward line (shape: the recombine after a split is a 抱在一起又变回… moment, not a stamped second sentence).
Vary every repeated beat — identical template across N cues is a NAMED defect (the "stamp"). Same pedagogy, fresh connective/framing each time (shape: 再看… / 这次最特别… / 还可以这样…). Stamping one sentence frame across 3 cues is the canonical failure this section exists to kill.
Short, concrete, positive. Natural spoken particles where a real teacher would (shape: 呀 / 啦 / 吧); never 书面语 stiffness, never an abstract framing where a concrete one fits.
Orthogonality guard (critical — do not let warmth break the existing discipline). Register is layered ON TOP of the complete-utterance rule, the ASR-safety rules, the no-drone / no-ellipsis rule, and the length budget. Warmth NEVER licenses dropping a term the relation binds, re-introducing a …… drone, breaking ASR-safety, or blowing the budget. A line must be warm AND complete AND ASR-safe AND on-budget; spoken particles add ~0 chars and don't move the budget. (The read-aloud self-check above now confirms BOTH completeness and register.)
Exemplars are SHAPE, not copy — read these as SHAPE; never copy a phrase into a lesson. Two before/after pairs, purely to illustrate the transform:
A stamped relation → a warm, varied version. ❌ <whole>可以分成<a>和<b>。<a>和<b>合成<whole>。 (×3, identical) → ✅ first split: a look-hook + the split, then the recombine as a 抱在一起又变回… discovery; second split: 再看…还可以这样分… with a different image (手拉手); third: genuine affect (这次最特别啦…). Same pedagogy, three fresh frames.
A bare quiz → a guiding question handed to the child. ❌ <whole>可以分成几和几？ → ✅ 那现在，谁来告诉我——<whole>可以分成几和几呀？
ASR risk flags
Single-character utterances (e.g., bare "分", "合"), 1-syllable Mandarin words, and homophone-rich sentences risk ASR low-confidence alignment in Wave 3a. For each risky cue, propose a mitigation:
Pair the single-character term with a multi-character companion in the same cue ("分开" before bare "分").
Move the risky term off the end of the utterance.
Insert a sentence-internal break (period or em-dash) to give ASR a token boundary.
If a mitigation is rejected (e.g., pedagogy requires the bare term), document the decision and flag for Wave 3a's audit.
L2 / mixed-language is NOT an ASR risk to strip. The ASR model is Chinese-English bilingual and voice.json's tokenPattern matches both scripts ([㐀-鿿]|[A-Za-z']+), so an English target word in narration aligns fine (verified: hello/I'm/goodbye align with matchScores ≥0.87). Put the L2 word in narration AND caption, and include it in phrase (it is a real token to match). Wave 3a must NOT revert or delete a deliberate L2 target word — for a language lesson it is the frozen teaching content, not a transcription hazard. (Only genuine ASR hazards — bare single Mandarin chars, homophone runs — get mitigated.) One real Aoede quirk to design around: a 3-item comma list (A，B，C，) runs on / repeats — break repeated targets into separate breath-groups (。) instead.
NEVER write an in-text ellipsis to make a pause — it becomes a held-vowel DRONE. Gemini renders I'm…… Sam / I'm...... Sam as a sustained ~5s held Iiiii/mmmm tone (the listener hears irritating "white noise"), not a beat of silence. This is a hard defect (the deterministic audio gate flags it as 🔴 DRONE). An intra-cue pause has exactly two correct forms: (1) a typed gap on the cue ({ seconds, reason }) — the reconcile holds the cue window open with FREE silence after the clip; or (2) split into sub-beats (a model-target-slow cue that says the target at natural pace, then a learner-response/beat gap, then the next sub-beat as its own short cue). Say each word at a natural pace; never stretch one with dots.
Captions
Each cue carries one caption. Caption text is the spoken narration verbatim, broken at natural phrase boundaries if longer than ~14 chars. Captions display through the entire cue window (start to end), not just the narration window — they linger ≤0.3s past audio end as Wave 3.5's tail kicks in. Composer wires this via the caption layer reading the cue boundaries.
The caption is the INDEPENDENT voice channel: it is ALWAYS the full spoken line — never shortened to keywords, never suppressed to make room for an on-screen label. emphasis only highlights words inside the ribbon; it never replaces the text. On-screen keywords are a SEPARATE thing the scene draws (small pointed annotations — kids-eye §1.5); the caption field here stays the verbatim voice.
Reinforcement & replay (pedagogy §8)
If pedagogy.md/storyboard.md mark a cue as reinforcement, the narration realizes it — that is real teaching content, not filler:
Replay cues reuse the same clip. When the storyboard marks a cue replay of <id>, do NOT write fresh narration — emit the SAME narration/phrase/caption so Wave 3a/3.5 can reuse the identical voiced clip (the child meets the target again, identically; no new TTS roll). Note the replay so the composer plays the same audio.
Choral / modeling lines. "跟我说：Hello… Hello!" — model then invite the echo; a slow, repeated target is correct here, not an ASR hazard (break repeats into 。 breath-groups).
The wait-time is a gap, authored — not narrated. When the storyboard marks an echo-* cue (an invite-echo with its wait-time), the cue's narration is the prompt only ("跟我说：Hello"); the held silence is a gap: { "seconds": <3–5>, "reason": "learner-response" } on that cue. In v4 cue-anchored audio a gap is a typed timeline hold: the cue's clip plays at the cue start, then the reconcile holds the window open for gap.seconds of FREE silence (no audio scheduled across it — never baked into a WAV, never a TTS call). The composer fills it with a "your turn" affordance. Never express a pause by writing "……" or padding the narration (that drones — see the held-vowel rule above). Other intentional silences use the same field with a different reason — "animation-hold" to let a visual land, "breath", "beat". (docs/pipeline-architecture.md §10 + the v4 changelog.)
Reason per cue, don't template. How many repeats, where, how long each wait — comes from pedagogy's reinforcement line + §8 floors, not a fixed rule. A new foreign sound wants the high end (≥5s wait); an obvious thing wants none.
What this skill does NOT do anymore
❌ No §3 post-narration hold table. That mechanism is deleted. See docs/pipeline-architecture.md §6.
❌ No total-runtime targeting. The lesson is as long as max(visual, narration) summed across cues. Do not pad to hit a brief-level "target length." But "no padding" is not "rush": if pedagogy called for reinforcement (replays, choral repeats, spaced recall), those are real cues with real narration — write them. A language lesson taught properly is long because it reinforces, not because it was padded. Length emerges from the teaching — neither padded nor starved.
Acquisition cues carry the FULL move sequence, sized to the floors — never minimized. When pedagogy marks a cue as an acquisition target (a sound/word/phrase the child must produce), its narration carries the whole arc — model → repeat → pause → echo → (wait-time) → recap — and is sized to each move's time budget in .agents/TEACHING-ACTIONS.md (model-target-slow ~9–15s incl. 2–3 slower-than-default models, gloss ~3–4s, invite-echo + a real ≥3–5s SILENT child-response gap, spaced-recall ~15–30s). Do not shrink an acquisition line to its terse minimum. Going far UNDER the comprehension floor (one terse line, three crammed exposures, no wait-time) is starvation, not "accepted drift" — flag it back, don't ship it. (The genuine anti-FILLER rule above still holds: more time means more REAL reinforcement + wait-time, never padding.)
❌ No per-cue duration ESTIMATES that downstream waves treat as contract. Your char-rate math is a hint for narration LENGTH; cue boundaries come from Wave 3a + 3.5.
Report back
Total narration char count + estimated total seconds (calibrated rate).
Any narration-leakage fixes you made vs the storyboard draft.
Read-aloud confirmation: one line stating you read every cue's narration aloud and each is a complete, grammatical utterance that names every term its relation binds — no stranded token, no dangling verb, no dropped term (e.g. a whole, a result, a reply) — naming any line you rewrote from a fragment to a complete sentence.
Register confirmation: one line stating each cue's narration passes the five register laws (## Register) — warm teacher voice, no stamped template across cues — and naming any cue you de-stamped or warmed from a flat draft.
