Spaces:
Running
Running
| # Pre-Spec Assessment And Quality Contract | |
| Use this reference before authoring an `ObjectSculptSpec`. The purpose is to prevent shallow specs that are technically valid but too vague to recreate the reference object. | |
| Do not use fixed domain profiles. Assess the object from observed traits, complexity, and target fidelity. | |
| ## Soft Object Classification | |
| Describe the object using multiple axes: | |
| - form language: organic, hard-surface, mechanical, architectural, botanical-like, character-like, amorphous, sculptural, fabric-like, transparent-like | |
| - structure kind: single body, compound object, branching hierarchy, repeated modules, layered shell, articulated assembly, deformable surface | |
| - motion potential: static prop, whole-object transform, articulated, bendable, detachable, destructible, effect-emitter | |
| - material families: wood, bark, leaf, metal, stone, ceramic, plastic, rubber, cloth, glass-like, liquid-like, skin-like, mixed | |
| These are descriptors, not domain templates. Use only what the image supports. | |
| ## Complexity Scoring | |
| Score each axis from 0 to 3: | |
| - silhouette complexity: simple outline to heavily interrupted/organic silhouette | |
| - component count: one piece to many visible subparts | |
| - hierarchy depth: flat object to deep parent-child structure | |
| - repetition density: none to thousands of repeated marks/leaves/scales/rivets | |
| - material layer count: one material to many layered local material responses | |
| - local detail density: plain surface to dense scratches, bumps, moss, seams, chips, pores, or grain | |
| - occlusion risk: fully visible to many hidden/inferred parts | |
| - action readiness need: static to many pivots/sockets/colliders/destruction seams | |
| Map total judgment to: | |
| - `simple`: few parts, low detail, one or two materials | |
| - `moderate`: several parts, visible local detail, shallow hierarchy | |
| - `complex`: many parts, repeated systems, multiple materials, several hierarchy levels | |
| - `ultra-complex`: dense organic/mechanical/architectural structure where fidelity depends on deep hierarchy and repeated microstructure | |
| ## Quality Contract | |
| Before generating code, define exactly what makes the model good enough: | |
| - definition of done for this object | |
| - minimum macro, meso, and micro feature counts | |
| - required repeated systems and their distribution rules | |
| - required material layers and local overrides | |
| - screenshot viewpoints required for visual comparison | |
| - failure modes that should block `continue` | |
| Good feature groups are specific to the image: | |
| - weak: `make leaves look good` | |
| - strong: `leaf clusters must form irregular overlapping canopy masses, with varied card size/orientation/color and gaps exposing secondary branches` | |
| - weak: `add bark texture` | |
| - strong: `trunk and primary branches need vertical ridges, cavity-darkened cracks, moss/lichen patches near roots and inner forks, roughness variation, and nonuniform displacement/bump` | |
| ## Strict Quality Gate | |
| Run `../../forge/stage2_spec/validate_sculpt_spec.py spec.json --strict-quality` before code generation. The script path is relative to the skill folder. | |
| If strict validation fails: | |
| - refine `preSpecAssessment` if complexity was underestimated | |
| - refine `qualityContract` if definition of done is too generic | |
| - add missing components, material layers, repetition systems, evidence refs, or local features | |
| - only lower the quality bar if the user explicitly accepts a simpler approximation | |
| The gate should block code generation when the spec could describe many different objects instead of the provided reference. | |