clear-view

Use when the user wants to quickly understand a conversation, article, paper, tutorial, product brief, long thread, or messy discussion: what is going on, who said what, topics, positions, agreements/disagreements, or a clearer structural explanation. Always delivers a structured text version plus a lightweight self-contained HTML infographic.

Turn any material into "what is going on right now": first a structured text version, then a default visual HTML. Never take sides, never invent facts that are not in the source.

Core principles

• Two deliverables, always: every time, give a text version + a visual version (unless the user explicitly asks for only one).
• Shortest that works: pick sections by material type; skip anything the material does not have.
• Faithful to the source: attribute views to their speakers; when unsure, mark "unclear in source"; never add drama.

When to use / not use

Use: muddled conversations, long articles that are hard to skim, tutorials with an unclear outline, scattered product features, multi-party debates where agreements and differences are hard to tell apart, or when the user says "explain this clearly / draw this clearly / sort this out".

Do not use: the user only wants a one-line summary; only wants code changes or implementation; only wants a translation; or wants a developer-architecture visualization and explicitly names the original show-me workflow.

Delivery contract

1) Text version (give it directly in chat)

Choose from the sections below to fit the material. Write a section if it applies, skip it if not, and keep headings short:

Section	When it appears
Topic	Almost always: one sentence
What is going on now	One-sentence status summary (put it near the top)
Structure / flow / outline	Tutorials, long articles, documentation
Features / capabilities	Product briefs
What each party said	Conversations, meetings, multi-person threads (bullets per person)
Topic threads	When 2+ topics run at once: one line per topic
Common ground	When parties overlap
Differences / points of contention	When there is disagreement or something unresolved
Open / needs clarification	When the source is vague or references are unclear
Summary	At most 3 points; do not repeat "What is going on now"

Text version rules: conclusion first; lists over long paragraphs; key quotes may be quoted briefly, never paste whole passages.

2) Visual version (default: lightweight HTML infographic)

• Default: write one self-contained HTML file (single file, opens offline) that uses simple diagrams to explain relationships, flows, and who said what, instead of piling up more prose.
• People: for multi-person conversations, distinguish speakers with simple character blocks or small figure markers (fixed colors/labels, with a legend saying who is who).
• Topic branches: for multiple topics, use columns or branching lines, and mark shared nodes and fork points.
• Flow / architecture: show steps as a horizontal or vertical flow; show system relationships with simple boxes and lines.
• Add more only when needed: Mermaid, call trees, file trees, diffs, embedded in the HTML or as a text appendix. They never replace the default HTML.
• Delivery: hand the HTML file to the user in a form they can open (attachment or equivalent); file name clear-view-{short-slug}.html.
• Look and feel: readable font size, sufficient contrast, scannable on mobile; minimal decoration, no irrelevant animation; labels in the source language (if the user writes in Chinese, use Chinese).

Steps

1. Confirm the scope of the material (pasted text / link / specified passage). If it is very long, split it into parts, but the conclusion must still cover the overall "what is going on now".
2. Classify the type: conversation | article/paper | tutorial | product brief | mixed.
3. Extract topic, speakers, topic threads, agreements/differences, and open items, based only on the source.
4. Output the text version (using the sections above).
5. Generate and deliver the default visual HTML; if the user only wants text or only wants the diagram, follow that choice.
6. If a key point in the source is vague: record it under "Open", and mark it on the diagram with a dashed line or question mark. Do not guess it into a solid-line conclusion.

Quick reference by material type

• Conversation / debate: people → each one's claims → focus of contention → agreements/differences → status summary; HTML uses characters + topic branches.
• Article / paper: question → argument/evidence structure → conclusion; HTML uses an argument structure or section map.
• Tutorial: goal → steps/modules → what you will learn; HTML uses a step flow.
• Product brief: what the product is → feature list → who it is for; HTML uses a feature map.

Common mistakes

Mistake	Fix
Only a long summary, no structured sections	Produce the text version per the contract
Only Mermaid, no HTML	A lightweight HTML must come first by default
Writing inferences as facts	Mark "unclear in source" or move it to Open
Piling on animation or decorative copy to "look good"	Remove it; keep only labels and relationships that aid understanding
Cute figures but you cannot tell who is who	Fixed colors + legend; label with names/roles
Several topics squashed into one timeline	Split into topic threads, then mark the crossing points

Red flags: stop and correct

• About to deliver only one of the two deliverables (and the user did not ask for just one)
• The diagram contains a conclusion that is not in the source
• Using developer show-me code trees in place of a conversation/article clarification
• Turning "clear presentation" into a rewrite or taking sides