Game Studio Agent Architecture — complete setup (Phases 1-7)

48 coordinated Claude Code subagents for indie game development:
- 3 leadership agents (creative-director, technical-director, producer)
- 10 department leads (game-designer, lead-programmer, art-director, etc.)
- 23 specialist agents (gameplay, engine, AI, networking, UI, tools, etc.)
- 12 engine-specific agents (Godot, Unity, Unreal with sub-specialists)

Infrastructure:
- 34 skills (slash commands) for workflows, reviews, and team orchestration
- 8 hooks for commit validation, asset checks, session management
- 11 path-scoped rules enforcing domain-specific standards
- 28 templates for design docs, reports, and collaborative protocols

Key features:
- User-driven collaboration protocol (Question → Options → Decision → Draft → Approval)
- Engine version awareness with knowledge-gap detection (Godot 4.6 pinned)
- Phase gate system for development milestone validation
- CLAUDE.md kept under 80 lines with extracted doc imports

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/skills/architecture-decision/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+---
+name: architecture-decision
+description: "Creates an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) documenting a significant technical decision, its context, alternatives considered, and consequences. Every major technical choice should have an ADR."
+argument-hint: "[title]"
+user-invocable: true
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write
+---
+
+When this skill is invoked:
+
+1. **Determine the next ADR number** by scanning `docs/architecture/` for
+   existing ADRs.
+
+2. **Gather context** by reading related code and existing ADRs.
+
+3. **Guide the user through the decision** by asking clarifying questions if
+   the title alone is not sufficient.
+
+4. **Generate the ADR** following this format:
+
+```markdown
+# ADR-[NNNN]: [Title]
+
+## Status
+[Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded by ADR-XXXX]
+
+## Date
+[Date of decision]
+
+## Context
+
+### Problem Statement
+[What problem are we solving? Why does this decision need to be made now?]
+
+### Constraints
+- [Technical constraints]
+- [Timeline constraints]
+- [Resource constraints]
+- [Compatibility requirements]
+
+### Requirements
+- [Must support X]
+- [Must perform within Y budget]
+- [Must integrate with Z]
+
+## Decision
+
+[The specific technical decision made, described in enough detail for someone
+to implement it.]
+
+### Architecture Diagram
+[ASCII diagram or description of the system architecture this creates]
+
+### Key Interfaces
+[API contracts or interface definitions this decision creates]
+
+## Alternatives Considered
+
+### Alternative 1: [Name]
+- **Description**: [How this would work]
+- **Pros**: [Advantages]
+- **Cons**: [Disadvantages]
+- **Rejection Reason**: [Why this was not chosen]
+
+### Alternative 2: [Name]
+- **Description**: [How this would work]
+- **Pros**: [Advantages]
+- **Cons**: [Disadvantages]
+- **Rejection Reason**: [Why this was not chosen]
+
+## Consequences
+
+### Positive
+- [Good outcomes of this decision]
+
+### Negative
+- [Trade-offs and costs accepted]
+
+### Risks
+- [Things that could go wrong]
+- [Mitigation for each risk]
+
+## Performance Implications
+- **CPU**: [Expected impact]
+- **Memory**: [Expected impact]
+- **Load Time**: [Expected impact]
+- **Network**: [Expected impact, if applicable]
+
+## Migration Plan
+[If this changes existing code, how do we get from here to there?]
+
+## Validation Criteria
+[How will we know this decision was correct? What metrics or tests?]
+
+## Related Decisions
+- [Links to related ADRs]
+- [Links to related design documents]
+```
+
+5. **Save the ADR** to `docs/architecture/adr-[NNNN]-[slug].md`.