Visual checks — review every format before publishing

A responsive Manic story can share its content and timing across a Reel, feed post, square video, and landscape lesson. Before recording those versions, run one publishing audit:

manic check examples/reactive-multiformat.manic --canvas all

Manic rebuilds the source at four logical canvases—portrait, 4:5 feed, square, and 16:9 landscape—then checks the settled frame of every named story stage. A clean result looks like this:

ok — examples/reactive-multiformat.manic [portrait]: visual checks passed
ok — examples/reactive-multiformat.manic [feed]: visual checks passed
ok — examples/reactive-multiformat.manic [square]: visual checks passed
ok — examples/reactive-multiformat.manic [landscape]: visual checks passed
ok — examples/reactive-multiformat.manic: visual audit passed all 4 formats

Use this after the story and layout feel right, but before spending time on the final render.

What the first audit catches

Visual-check v1 reports four common publishing problems:

Each message names the format, story stage, time, and responsible entity, then suggests a practical fix:

warning [square · takeaway @ 8.45s]: `caption` overlaps `result`
  entities: `caption` and `result`
  suggestion: separate the entities, shorten/wrap the text, or reflow this format

The command exits unsuccessfully when it finds either an error or warning, so it can guard a publishing script or CI job. Ordinary manic check file.manic remains the fast parse-and-validation check. To validate only one responsive layout, keep using manic check file.manic --canvas square.

Why named steps improve the result

The audit reviews the settled state at the end of each step("name") (or marker-defined stage), not every frame of a transition. That avoids treating a deliberate entrance, exit, or equation rewrite crossfade as a layout failure. It also makes a diagnosis useful: takeaway tells you which idea needs fixing, not merely that something happened at 8.45 seconds.

If a file has no named stage, Manic checks its final authored frame. For a creator story, prefer meaningful names such as question, experiment, proof, and takeaway; they help editing, seeking, publishing, and review.

Fixes that stay reusable

When the audit finds a problem, preserve one responsive source:

• Position with w, h, cx, and cy instead of copying pixel coordinates between files.
• Give continuing content stable ids so a message points to the same entity in every stage.
• Shorten copy or use wrap(id, width) before reducing the type size.
• Use one small if h > 1.45*w { ... } else if w > 1.25*h { ... } else { ... } layout branch when the composition genuinely needs to reflow.
• Choose the correct Creator safe=shorts|reels|tiktok|clean profile. Use safezone(...) while previewing the protected area; it is a design guide, not content for the finished video.
• Leave enough room for the busiest settled stage, not only the opening frame.

The gold reference is reactive-multiformat.manic. It uses one timeline and passes the audit in all four formats.

What still needs human review

Visual-check v1 is intentionally conservative. It does not yet judge collision paths during transitions, camera-transformed world or 3D bounds, detached labels and links, reading speed, or whether an equation agrees mathematically with a plot. It also cannot decide whether the hierarchy is beautiful or the hook is compelling.

After the automated audit passes, preview the hook, busiest transition, result, and end hold at phone size. The command catches mechanical layout mistakes; the creator still owns clarity, rhythm, and taste.

Next: Animate one value through many connected views →