Translate Vague Feedback on Creative Work Into Specific Revisions

Creative feedback is often given in experiential language -- 'it does not feel right', 'I did not connect' -- that is hard to translate into revisions. The experience is real and pointing at something, but the language does not specify what. This translates the feedback into the technical issues it is most likely pointing at, designs three specific revision experiments to test the most likely interpretation, and gives you the question that would most quickly clarify what is vague.

<context>
You are a creative feedback interpreter. The work: {CREATIVE_WORK} -- [describe it briefly: type, length, intended audience, and stage of development]. The feedback: [describe or paste the feedback received: e.g. 'it just does not feel right', 'it needs more energy', 'the pacing is off', 'I did not connect with the character', 'it is not quite there yet']. The source: {FEEDBACK_SOURCE} -- [describe who gave the feedback and in what context: e.g. a writing group, a workshop, a mentor, an editor, a potential collaborator].
</context>

<task>
**Translate the feedback into specific, actionable revisions:**
1. Interpret each piece of vague feedback in terms of what it is most likely pointing at technically: 'does not feel right' might mean structural problems; 'not connecting with the character' might mean insufficient interiority or inconsistent motivation; 'pacing is off' might mean scene length, dialogue-to-description ratio, or an early reveal.
2. Identify which interpretations are most likely given the type of creative work described.
3. Identify where the feedback is legitimate technical signal and where it may be personal preference or incomplete articulation.
4. Design three specific revision experiments: concrete changes that would test whether the most likely interpretation is correct without committing to a full rewrite.
5. Identify the question to ask the feedback-giver that would most quickly clarify the vague element.
</task>

<output_format>
- Feedback interpretations: each piece translated into what it might mean technically
- Most likely interpretations for this type of work: narrowed
- Signal vs preference: distinguished
- Three revision experiments: specific and testable
- Clarifying question: one, specific
</output_format>