rough-cut
Skill6 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Build the rough cut in BashCut by quote: lines resolved to word-exact ranges, kept as selects with reasons, placed in story order; also long → short clips from a podcast or stream. Triggers: "cắt thô", "rough cut", "chọn đoạn", "lọc câu hay", "cắt podcast thành short", "highlight", "selects", "cắt giữa chữ".
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- dotslashsimran/simcrafttheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- appariciojunior/video-editor-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- j912835225-prog/whetstonetheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- m15851855393-boop/mandarin-talking-head-rough-cuttheir own version, first seen Jul 28, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 4
- appariciojunior/video-editor-skills★ 246same name
- dotslashsimran/simcraft★ 69same name
- j912835225-prog/whetstone★ 1same name
- m15851855393-boop/mandarin-talking-head-rough-cut★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- audio-mixSkill
- beat-cutSkill
- captions-textSkill
- color-gradeSkill
- edit-workflowSkill
- effectsSkill
- footage-surveySkill
- librarySkill
- motion-graphicsSkill
- reviewSkill
- self-learnSkill
- setupSkill
- stock-imagesSkill
- style-studySkill
- visual-planSkill
- voiceoverSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 48
Takes: default to the last complete take ("people warm up", T06 §3), then confirm by reading or asking.
- Distinctive: line 75
Prefer these tiers to a weighted score (T06 §3).
- Distinctive: line 81
no unresolved "he", "this", "that one" pointing to something outside the clip.
- Distinctive: line 82
no reference to earlier context ("as I said").
- Distinctive: line 83
no long lead-in before the point.
- Distinctive: line 98
Never cut natural speech short to hit a quota or a "sweet spot" (T06 §4).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Rough cut by quote
You choose by text; BashCut resolves it to frames and flags edges inside a word or sentence; it never ranks or picks. Never type timestamps from memory or from SRT lines: tools that let the model write times are off by 0.6–1.5 s (T06 §4). The ranges below are starting points; choose within them for this footage.
A rough cut is selection and order only: no music, titles, grade or effects unless the user asks (T06 §4). Be generous on the first pass and tighten later: a discarded moment is slow to find again (T06 §2).
Before selecting
- Transcripts and speech gaps of each talking file (
media transcribe,media transcript,media speech-map;bc:footage-survey). When the speech-map says there is no separation (music or noise under the voice), it gives no gaps: do not invent them. - Classify the source (T06 §4): words (the content is what is said: talks, interviews, tutorials), reactions (laughter, surprise: watch the picture; laughter and "clip that" lag the moment they react to) or visual (demonstrations, sport: the transcript is weak evidence, use the survey's descriptions).
- The brief and plan (
project data brief,project data plan): length, outputs and sections decide what is worth keeping. - Take the survey's recording cues (
bc:footage-survey, hygiene checklist): no range starts, ends or runs across a cue; after "cut that", "take two" or "làm lại" the dead take is not a candidate. Between two takes of a line ([again T]inmedia digest,alternativesfromresolve-range) the later one wins unless you looked and the earlier is better; say which in the select's reason. - Cut restarts and repeated phrases, including the ones the transcript hides (the survey's suspect words: a word over ~1 s or under ~0.4 confidence, re-transcribed). A select never holds a phrase said twice; keep the later, complete take, and check the range again with the re-transcribed words before placing it.
The select-by-quote loop
For each moment: bashcut media resolve-range M3 --quote "the first time I opened the app it crashed". Pick
among alternatives by context.
matchedunder 1: readtext. A misheard word is fine, but a range that holds only one or two of your words means the quote is not there; never place it.- An edge
midSentenceis allowed only when you mean it (a deliberate interruption). Otherwise move it to the nearest sentence edge the result gives and resolve again. - Cut on the
resolve-rangeresult as it is; never add padding by hand. In connected speech the next word starts within ~0.1 s: a 0.1 s pad pulled the neighbouring words in (lesson, one ad edit). To hold a breath or a reaction, resolve a wider quote or move the edge to a sentence edge the result gives, then check the trim with--dry-run(cutsInsideWordmust be empty) before applying. - Gaps as cut points (T06 §3, video-use): ≥400 ms of quiet is a clean cut; 150–400 ms needs a look at the picture;
<150 ms is unsafe. Whisper-style word ends hide pauses, so trust
media speech-mapgaps over word ends (T06 §4). - Takes: default to the last complete take ("people warm up", T06 §3), then confirm by reading or asking; a fluent take is not always better.
- Long lifts: removing more than 10–20 s at once needs a look (T06 §3): quiet is not empty picture in a screen demo.
Store your choices as selects with reasons, in one edit (bashcut selects set selects.json --base-rev N):
[{"media": "M3", "from": 61.42, "to": 74.9, "quote": "the first time I opened the app it crashed",
"reason": "hook: the problem in one sentence", "evidence": "edges on sentence ends; last complete take of three",
"mustKeep": true}]Give order when the story order differs from the recording order. The user can keep, reject or reorder selects
in the Media panel: before placing, read selects list again and follow their choices. Never undo a user's
rejection; ask instead. Keep and reject with a reason ({"id":"S1","status":"kept","reason":"hook and payoff"});
mark the lines the edit cannot lose with mustKeep.
Blind second pass (long → short, or many candidates)
Propose about 2× the clips you need (T06 §3): 30–45 % of AI picks are duds (hotclip, T06 §3). Then judge them
blind: a fresh sub-agent (or you, ignoring your reasons) gets each candidate's text with one sentence of context on
each side (media transcript --from S --to E) and returns a verdict with one sentence why:
- publish: stands alone and pays off; mark
kept. - review: promising but needs a trim, a different start or the user's eye; keep
candidatewith the note. - drop: fails the standalone test or quote-mines; mark
rejectedwith the reason.
Prefer these tiers to a weighted score (T06 §3). Ranking by score breaks story order; a highlight batch kept in recording order hides the best clips: order by narrative for one video, by strength for a batch (T06 §2).
The standalone test
A clip shown without the rest must make sense (T06 §2, openmontage):
- no unresolved "he", "this", "that one" pointing to something outside the clip;
- no reference to earlier context ("as I said");
- no long lead-in before the point; the setup, turn and payoff are inside;
- it does not stop before the payoff or on a comma;
- a stitch of two ranges never makes a meaning that was not said: do not stitch across a "but" or "however" (T06 §2).
Length
Length follows the moment: setup + turn + payoff, then capped by the platform (T06 §3).
| Kind | Range | What moves it |
| vertical short | 15–90 s | one-liners shorter, story arcs longer; cap from platforms get <id> (hard vs recommended) |
| topic or chapter clip | 1–6 min | source length and platform |
| sum of selects vs the plan's length | ±10–15 % | report the drift; strict for fixed slots (T06 §3) |
| yield from a long source | no quota; often about 1 per 2–10 min | report the candidate count and why you kept N (T06 §3) |
Never cut natural speech short to hit a quota or a "sweet spot" (T06 §4).
Placing and checking
The quick path writes the kept lines straight into plan.cut ({media, quote, section}, cover for pictures
over a line), then plan check and plan apply --why "rough cut: 7 lines, hook first"; the selects stay as the
record of what was picked. Or selects place (kept selects on Main, in order); then timeline sheet --cuts. One
range without selects: media place --media M3 --from 61.42 --to 74.9. Before any later trim, --dry-run reports
cutsInsideWord; fix those before applying. captions find "words as said" finds where a line now plays. A cut
inside a word is a review error; look at doubtful cuts with review window F.
Then G3: checkpoint request G3 --summary "<duration> against <plan range>, N selects, what was dropped
and why" --attach <sheet path>. When G3 is ask, wait for the user's answer before rhythm, sound and text;
otherwise go on.
Several shorts from one source
One project per short, not one timeline: project derive (a sibling per kept select; variants list shows
them). Open each (project open <path>) and finish it through the stages of
bc:edit-workflow (its own hook, captions and review). Compare two versions of one short with variants create
and variants diff.
Log: run append stage --stage rough-cut --text "20 candidates, 9 kept, 3 shorts derived".
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

