Shorts
Review shot composition, visible information, narration, and timing. In this mystery, check when the sender name enters the frame while keeping the watch clue readable.
AN AI-ASSISTED WORKSPACE FOR VISUAL STORYTELLERS
Guruki Labs is designing an AI-assisted workspace for creators making recurring Shorts and webtoon episodes. It will keep story context and earlier decisions connected through revisions, ready for the next episode.
Informed by internal production work and a webtoon workflow prototype, our first planned Claude integration will review scene plans against supplied context and organize creator choices into editable briefs.
Explore the workflowConcept and prototype design · Claude integration planned
INFORMED BY PRODUCTION WORK
When scripts, scene plans, and past decisions live apart, each revision can mean piecing the story context back together. We’re designing a workspace to carry those decisions—and their reasons—into the next scene or episode.
The concept draws on internal content production work involving narration timing, subtitle alignment, rendering, and review, alongside an internal webtoon workflow prototype. Revision review is the first task we plan to evaluate within the broader workspace.
01 / INTENT, REVISION, NEXT DECISION
Our first evaluation will focus on creators and small teams producing recurring episodes: when a story changes, what needs review—and what can stay?
02 / REVIEW AGAINST STORY INTENT
Try a different intent to see why the same scene may need a different decision.
Current intent: keep the identity hidden until episode 5. R1
The sender name in S3 could expose the informant before R1 allows it. Adjust that part of the scene. R1 + S3
Retain the visible wristwatch clue for the next episode. D1
Example direction A is shown below. Your selection changes this prepared explanation.
A fictional, prepared example of the planned workflow. Explore how story intent changes the scene brief.
04 / FROM A CHOICE TO A BRIEF
The planned workspace would organize the creator’s direction into an editable scene brief. The relevant sources, changed detail, preserved clue, and open questions would travel into the next revision or episode.
Read the default sample briefThe text sample includes both alternatives and the changed-intent case. It is separate from your on-page selection.
SCENE BRIEF / EPISODE 3
Illustrative output · Prewritten scene brief
02 / A SMALLER, CLEARER NEXT STEP
We’re designing a common production workspace for Shorts and webtoons. A revision review is our first evaluation task: bring story intent, scene plans, and earlier decisions together so the creator can choose a useful next step.
Bring the script, story rules, and relevant prior decisions together. Make the current intent explicit.
Find concerns tied to the supplied context. Compare useful options, keep adequate plans, and ask when information is missing.
Let the creator choose. Keep the direction, its reason, and open questions in a scene brief for the next production step.
03 / A SHARED FOUNDATION
The same creative intent needs different checks in different media. We’re exploring a shared foundation that keeps those differences visible.
Review shot composition, visible information, narration, and timing. In this mystery, check when the sender name enters the frame while keeping the watch clue readable.
Review panel composition, dialogue, information reveals, and scrolling rhythm. In this mystery, check which panel exposes the sender while preserving the watch clue.
The same story constraints can guide each medium’s scene decisions. Each production plan needs its own review.
We’re designing the workspace to keep scene plans and creator decisions connected to the project context as a story changes. The goal is to carry useful decisions into the next scene, revision, or episode with less need to rebuild the context.
04 / DESIGNED FOR ONGOING PRODUCTION
We’re exploring a creator subscription for ongoing planning and review across scenes, revisions, and episodes. The planned workspace would carry scene briefs and prior decisions into subsequent work.
Pricing and packaging will follow what we learn from repeated use.
Our first planned evaluations will bring together story intent, relevant project notes, prior decisions, and a draft scene plan.
We plan to use Claude to ground the review in supplied context, compare useful options, and ask focused questions when a decision is unclear. Adequate plans should stay as they are. The creator’s chosen direction would become an editable scene brief.
We will compare this workflow with creators’ current tools and a general Claude chat, including context preparation and maintenance effort, useful decisions, and reuse in production. API cost and latency will also be measured.
WHAT CHANGES BETWEEN EPISODES?
We’d like to hear from Shorts and webtoon creators about a recent revision: what you changed, what you kept, and how you carried that decision into production.
Share your workflow hello@gurukilabs.com