visual-explain

name visual-explain description Explain concepts visually using ASCII diagrams, flow charts, tables, and structural maps. Use when asked to explain, compare, or show how something works. Visual Explain Explain concepts visually using ASCII diagrams, tables, flow charts, and structural maps. The visual IS the explanation — prose is secondary. When to invoke Trigger phrases: "explain visually", "show me a diagram", "draw this out", "chart this", "map this", "visualize this", "show me how this works", "diagram this", "sketch this out". Also invoke when /visual-explain is used directly. Visual vocabulary Use the right format for the right job: Concept type Visual format Flows and pipelines ASCII arrow diagrams ( → , ↓ , ──▶ ) Architecture / components Box diagrams with labeled connections Comparisons and trade-offs Tables with columns per option Hierarchies and containment Tree structures or nested box diagrams Temporal sequences ASCII sequence diagrams (actor columns + arrows) State changes Before/after side-by-side diagrams Decision logic Flowcharts with diamond decision nodes Rules Lead with the visual. Always produce the diagram or table FIRST. Prose comes after, if needed at all. Minimal prose. Keep explanatory text to 1-2 sentences per diagram. The visual carries the explanation — prose only clarifies what the visual cannot. Prefer multiple small diagrams over one complex one. Break a system into 2-3 focused visuals rather than cramming everything into a single diagram. Each diagram should have one clear point. Consistent visual language: [ boxes ] for components, modules, services ──▶ or → for data flow and control flow ─── for connections and relationships < diamonds > for decisions ( rounded ) for inputs/outputs │ and ─ for structure lines System explanations follow this order: Structure first (what are the parts, how do they relate) Data flow second (what moves between them) State changes third (how things evolve over time) Comparisons follow this order: Table first (options as columns, criteria as rows) Annotate the recommended choice with a brief reason below the table Keep diagrams under 40 lines tall and 72 characters wide. If a diagram exceeds this, split it into multiple diagrams with clear labels. Examples Flow diagram [ User Request ] │ ▼ [ Auth Middleware ] ──▶ [ 401 Unauthorized ] │ ▼ [ Route Handler ] │ ┌────┴────┐ ▼ ▼ [ Cache ] [ Database ] │ │ └────┬────┘ ▼ [ Response ] Comparison table Option A Option B Option C ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Speed Fast Medium Slow Cost $$$ $$ $ Complexity High Medium Low Reliability High High Medium ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ✓ Recommended: Option B — best balance of cost and speed. Sequence diagram Client Server Database │ │ │ │── POST /api ──▶│ │ │ │── INSERT ─────▶│ │ │◀── OK ─────────│ │◀── 201 ────────│ │ │ │ │ Hierarchy / tree egregore/ ├── bin/ Shell scripts (graph, notify, telemetry) ├── skills/ Cognitive skill definitions │ ├── harvest/ │ └── tui-design/ ├── memory/ Symlink → shared memory repo │ ├── people/ │ ├── handoffs/ │ └── knowledge/ └── .claude/ ├── commands/ Slash command definitions └── skills/ Claude Code skill files Before/after BEFORE AFTER ┌──────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────┐ │ Monolith │ │ API Gateway │ │ ┌────────────┐ │ │ │ │ │ Auth │ │ └─────────┬─────────┘ │ │ API │ │ │ │ │ DB │ │ ┌───────┼───────┐ │ │ Queue │ │ ▼ ▼ ▼ │ └────────────┘ │ [ Auth ] [ API ] [ Worker ] └──────────────────┘ │ │ │ └───┬───┘ │ ▼ ▼ [ DB ] [ Queue ]