mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-06-27 04:51:46 +00:00
Release v1.0.0 — concept-prototype/vertical-slice split, workflow restructure, polish (#50)
* Add /vertical-slice skill, prototype overhaul, and workflow integration - Add /vertical-slice skill for pre-production validation (Phase 4 gate) - Overhaul /prototype skill with two-mode design: concept prototype (Phase 1) vs vertical slice (Phase 4), with clearer differentiation and higher standards for VS - Update prototyper agent to own both prototype and vertical-slice workflows - Add prototype-report.md and vertical-slice-report.md output templates - Update WORKFLOW-GUIDE, quick-start, skills-reference, agent-coordination-map, and skill-flow-diagrams to fully integrate both skills into the 7-phase pipeline - Remove orphaned empty quick-prototype/ directory Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * sync v1 counts + polish Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * Add entity inventory flow, relax vertical-slice gate, improve UX authoring prompts - /asset-spec: new Phase 0b entity & screen inventory when no argument and no existing inventory — reads GDDs/art-bible, proposes categorized list, writes design/assets/entity-inventory.md collaboratively - /asset-spec: entity/character target falls back to inline user description when no source doc exists, rather than failing - /gate-check: vertical slice changed from blocking to CONCERNS-only when absent; built-but-broken slice still fails; adds entity inventory as gate artifact - /ux-design: convert inline approval prompts to AskUserQuestion for structured option capture at key authoring decision points - workflow-catalog.yaml: entity-inventory step added to pre-production; UX spec min_count raised to 3; vertical-slice and prototype marked required: false with updated descriptions - .gitignore: exclude marrow/ eval tooling directory Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * Add missing AskUserQuestion widgets to 7 skills Audit found 11 decision points across 7 skills where structured option prompts were missing — using plain text, auto-selection, or no gate at all. Skills patched: - create-epics: per-epic approval + producer CONCERNS verdict - sprint-plan: producer CONCERNS verdict with scope/timeline options - milestone-review: AT RISK / OFF TRACK producer verdicts require acknowledgement - retrospective: existing-retro handling converted from plain text [A]/[B] - quick-design: classification confirmation + draft approve/revise/redirect - tech-debt add mode: category (6 options) + effort (S/M/L/XL) structured capture - regression-suite: no-arg mode selection instead of silent auto-detect - hotfix: severity confirmation gate before workflow begins Also added AskUserQuestion to allowed-tools headers for retrospective, quick-design, tech-debt, regression-suite, and hotfix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * Prep v1 stable: fix WORKFLOW-GUIDE counts, stale agent names, and skill model fields - WORKFLOW-GUIDE.md: correct agent count (48→49), skill count (66/68→73), add 6 missing skills to Appendix B, fix Creative category count (2→4), replace 3 non-existent agent names with correct ue-*/unity-* specialists, add missing godot-csharp/gdextension specialists to hierarchy, fix production/stories/ paths → production/epics/ - coordination-rules.md: replace "not yet used" with opt-in env var note - quick-start.md: rename duplicate "Validate the concept" label → "Prototype the mechanic" - skill-flow-diagrams.md: remove duplicate legacy UX pipeline section - All 62 skills missing model: field now have explicit model: sonnet Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix: comprehensive skill audit — consistency, UX, and flow gaps Two-pass audit fixing ~35 bugs across 41 files. Pre-production flow: - Brainstorm next-steps split into Path A (design-first) and Path B (prototype-first) — eliminates "prototype after architecture" confusion - /architecture-review added to pre-production flow in brainstorm and create-architecture handoffs - gate-check traceability check corrected to requirements-traceability.md - dev-story TR registry error now points to /architecture-review (not /create-epics) - start now writes production/stage.txt on first onboarding AskUserQuestion gaps filled: - balance-check, code-review, hotfix, day-one-patch, consistency-check all gain closing widgets and/or missing allowed-tools declarations - hotfix git branch creation now requires user confirmation - sprint-plan review-mode setup moved to Phase 0 (before gates run) - team-combat gains architecture→implementation approval gate - design-review APPROVED path consolidated from 3 widgets to 1 multiSelect All 9 team-* skills: - Phase 0 review-mode resolution added (solo/lean/full now respected) - team-audio output path fixed (design/gdd/ → design/audio/) - team-level final doc compilation delegated to level-designer subagent - team-narrative localization-lead added to composition list - team-qa sprint path fixed (flat files, not directories) - team-release NO-GO override captures written justification - team-live-ops Cancel verdict now explicitly BLOCKED Other fixes: - Art bible path standardized to design/art/art-bible.md (3 wrong refs) - AD-PHASE-GATE added to lean-mode skip list in director-gates.md - design-system duplicate 5d heading fixed; skeleton decline path added; mandatory agent spawns now respect review mode - story-readiness acceptance criteria thresholds now type-aware - create-stories gains multi-ADR and no-ADR handling guidance - consistency-check creates docs/consistency-failures.md on first run - retrospective frontmatter bash injection replaced with explicit Bash call - smoke-check ls -t gains PowerShell fallback - Conventional Commits format documented in coding-standards.md - gate-check: ADR acceptance gate, QA plan check, chain-of-verification tool-action requirement all added Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix: expose --review flag in argument-hints for all team-* skills All 9 team-* skills already implement Phase 0 review-mode resolution internally (full/lean/solo), but none advertised [--review full|lean|solo] in their argument-hint. Users had no way to discover the per-run override. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: add SECURITY.md with coordinated disclosure policy Defines scope, reporting process (GitHub private vulnerability reporting), contributor security guidelines for hooks/skills/agents, and 90-day coordinated disclosure timeline. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: add CONTRIBUTING.md with framework contribution guidelines Covers what PRs are welcome, skill/hook/agent technical requirements, the collaborative principle, testing expectations, commit format, and platform compatibility requirements. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: add v1.0.0-beta → v1.0 upgrade section to UPGRADING.md Documents the 17 commits since the beta tag: new /vertical-slice gate, entity inventory flow in /map-systems, AskUserQuestion widgets across 7 skills, --review flag exposure on team-* skills, bug fixes (#21, #36, #42, #43, #45), and the new CONTRIBUTING.md and SECURITY.md. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ description: "Reviews a game design document for completeness, internal consiste
|
||||
argument-hint: "[path-to-design-doc] [--depth full|lean|solo]"
|
||||
user-invocable: true
|
||||
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Task, AskUserQuestion
|
||||
model: sonnet
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 0: Parse Arguments
|
||||
@@ -95,7 +96,9 @@ Read the GDD and identify every domain present. A GDD can touch multiple domains
|
||||
| Data schema, resource structure | `systems-designer` |
|
||||
| Any gameplay system | `game-designer` (always) |
|
||||
|
||||
**Always spawn `game-designer` and `systems-designer` as a baseline minimum.** Every GDD touches their domain.
|
||||
Spawn `game-designer` for all GDDs that describe gameplay mechanics or player-facing rules.
|
||||
Spawn `systems-designer` for all GDDs that contain formulas or system interaction rules.
|
||||
These are the most common baselines — but not required for pure UI specs, audio specs, or lore documents. Use the domain table above to determine which specialists are truly relevant.
|
||||
|
||||
### Step 2 — Spawn all relevant specialists in parallel
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -212,14 +215,22 @@ After all revisions are complete, show a summary table (blocker → fix applied)
|
||||
|
||||
Never end the revision flow with plain text. Always close with this widget.
|
||||
|
||||
**Second widget — systems index update (always show this separately):**
|
||||
**Second widget — tracking records (combined, for APPROVED path):**
|
||||
|
||||
When the verdict is APPROVED, use a single `AskUserQuestion` with `multiSelect: true` to batch the two tracking updates:
|
||||
- Prompt: "Verdict: APPROVED. I can update the tracking records now. Select any you'd like me to complete:"
|
||||
- Options:
|
||||
- `Update systems-index.md status to 'Approved' for [system]`
|
||||
- `Append approval entry to design/gdd/reviews/[doc-name]-review-log.md`
|
||||
|
||||
If the review-log option is selected, append the same format as below. Execute both selected actions before showing the final closing widget.
|
||||
|
||||
When the verdict is NEEDS REVISION or MAJOR REVISION NEEDED, use separate widgets as before:
|
||||
|
||||
Use a second `AskUserQuestion`:
|
||||
- Prompt: "May I update `design/gdd/systems-index.md` to mark [system] as [In Review / Approved]?"
|
||||
- Options: `[A] Yes — update it` / `[B] No — leave it as-is`
|
||||
|
||||
**Third widget — review log (always offer):**
|
||||
|
||||
Use a third `AskUserQuestion`:
|
||||
- Prompt: "May I append this review summary to `design/gdd/reviews/[doc-name]-review-log.md`? This creates a revision history so future re-reviews can track what changed."
|
||||
- Options: `[A] Yes — append to review log` / `[B] No — skip`
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user