Release 1.1.0 — one config file, and a process weight you choose

`project.yaml` at the repo root is now the single source of truth for a
project's configuration, replacing `production/stage.txt`,
`production/review-mode.txt` and `.claude/docs/technical-preferences.md` (all
three still read as a fallback; nothing is force-deleted).

**`modes.rigor` — one question instead of six.** `minimal`, `standard` or
`full` fronts six knobs: `modes.workflow`, `docs.density`, `qa.level`,
`modes.story_granularity`, `modes.review_mode` and `team.size`. It defaults to
`minimal`, which is a change from 1.0's behaviour: the heavier tier was
measured costing several times more to reach working code without producing a
better result, and returning nothing when a fresh developer inherited the
project. Pin `modes.rigor: standard` to keep 1.0's process level.

Also in this release:

- `/settings` to view or change any setting, and `project.local.yaml` for
  per-developer preferences that should not be committed.
- `system_overrides` to hold one system to a higher standard than the rest of
  the project, and `testing.strict` to set per test type whether missing
  evidence blocks a story or warns.
- A story that changes anything the player sees is not closed until the game
  has been launched, observed, and a screenshot retained in
  `production/qa/evidence/`. A parse check is not a run. This holds at every
  rigor level, including `minimal`, where automated tests are waived but the
  look is not.
- The code root is engine-specific and enforced as such: Godot `src/`, Unity
  `Assets/`, Unreal `Source/<Module>/`. Two of the three will not build a
  project laid out any other way.
- Migration tooling for existing projects: `.claude/scripts/migrate-v1-config.sh`
  converts a 1.0 layout, non-destructively by default, with a report to review
  before `--finalize` deletes anything.
- Ask-before-write holds regardless of personal automation settings.

Upgrading from 1.0 or earlier: see UPGRADING.md. Full list of changes:
CHANGELOG.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016xvzG3i7pWQg4LjyDwWMXd

.claude/skills/brainstorm/SKILL.md

@@ -1,22 +1,99 @@
 ---
 name: brainstorm
-description: "Guided game concept ideation — from zero idea to a structured game concept document. Uses professional studio ideation techniques, player psychology frameworks, and structured creative exploration."
+description: "Guided concept ideation using professional studio techniques, player psychology, creative exploration."
 argument-hint: "[genre or theme hint, or 'open'] [--review full|lean|solo]"
 user-invocable: true
-allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, WebSearch, Task, AskUserQuestion
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, WebSearch, Agent, AskUserQuestion
 model: sonnet
 ---
 
-When this skill is invoked:
+!`source "${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR:-.}/.claude/hooks/yaml-helper.sh" 2>/dev/null && resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,docs.density,workflow`
+
+Resolved above — use as-is. No block → defaults in
+`.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`.
+
+
+`--review` overrides `review_mode`; store it for all gate spawns this run. See
+`.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in `.claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md` — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
+
+Every `AskUserQuestion` call follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`
+(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
+`automation_always_ask` categories always prompt).
+
+**`docs.density`** — it controls per-section *depth*, where `workflow`
+controls which sections exist. `modes.rigor` sets both together; set
+`docs.density` explicitly to vary depth alone: `terse` = pillar bullets + concept bullets;
+`balanced` = pillars + concept with brief rationale (default); `thorough` =
+pillars + concept + extensive rationale + alternatives. Apply it to every section
+you author.
+
+---
+
+## Tier branch — check `workflow` FIRST
+
+The `workflow` tier resolved above governs this skill's output:
+
+- **`standard` / `full`** → run the full flow ("When this skill is invoked" through
+  Phase 5 and the concept-document generation). No change.
+- **`minimal`** → run the **Lean Brief flow** immediately below and **STOP** — skip
+  Phases 1–5, the director gates (CD-PILLARS / AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL / TD-FEASIBILITY /
+  PR-SCOPE), and the full-length concept document entirely. Output is the one-page
+  `design/game-brief.md`, not `game-concept.md`.
+
+### Lean Brief flow (`workflow: minimal` only)
+
+A jam / small-scope session: capture the load-bearing thinking in one page, then get
+to code. Keep prompting light — a few exchanges, not fifteen. Author from the
+one-page template `.claude/docs/templates/game-brief.md` (6 required fields + 2
+one-liners). If `design/game-brief.md` already exists, read it and resume/refine
+rather than restart.
+
+1. **Concept** — from the argument hint (or one quick open question if none), propose
+   **2–3 one-line concepts** (verb-first or mashup, per Phase 2's techniques). One
+   `AskUserQuestion` to pick or combine — the only guaranteed creative prompt.
+2. **Fill the brief fields** conversationally (not one prompt each):
+   - **One-sentence pitch** — the excited one-liner.
+   - **Core loop** — the 2–4 step cycle the player repeats.
+   - **MVP** — the ruthlessly short feature list that makes it *the game* (each becomes
+     a story downstream). If it runs past ~7, push back on scope.
+   - **Out of scope** — what they're deliberately NOT building.
+   - **Build order** — sequence to build the MVP, risky / core-fun thing first.
+   - **Who it's for / what they feel** and **Art & audio direction** — one line each
+     (offer, don't force).
+   Present the filled brief back in full for a single confirmation.
+3. **Write approval** — `AskUserQuestion`: "Brief is ready. May I write it to
+   `design/game-brief.md`?" → `[A] Yes — write it` / `[B] Revise a field first`. On
+   [B], revise the named field, show before/after, re-ask; repeat until [A]. Then
+   write `design/game-brief.md` from the template, creating directories as needed.
+   Honor `modes.automation` for this write as elsewhere in the framework.
+4. **Next steps** (short — this is the point). **Read `engine.name` from
+   `project.yaml` first and list `/setup-engine` only if it is absent or empty:**
+   1. *(only when `engine.name` is absent or empty)* "`/setup-engine` — configure
+      the engine (required before code)"
+   2. "`/create-stories` — turn the brief's MVP list into implementable stories. The
+      epic is implicit at `minimal`; there is no separate `/create-epics` or
+      `/sprint-plan` — the brief's build order is the plan."
+   3. "`/dev-story` — first line of game code"
+
+   > **Why the condition.** `/start`'s `minimal` path runs `/setup-engine`
+   > *before* `/brainstorm`, and `/setup-engine` Section 2 states that a missing
+   > brief is expected because the brief is authored afterwards. Listing engine
+   > setup unconditionally here tells a user who just followed that path to go
+   > back and redo step one — the only skill in the four-step path that assumes
+   > it runs first.
+   Then output a one-line summary (pitch + MVP feature count + `design/game-brief.md`).
+
+Verdict: **COMPLETE** — game brief created; next stop is code. Do NOT run Phases 1–5,
+spawn any director gate, or write `game-concept.md` at this tier.
+
+---
+
+When this skill is invoked (`standard` / `full` tier — `minimal` uses the Lean Brief
+flow above):
 
 1. **Parse the argument** for an optional genre/theme hint (e.g., `roguelike`,
    `space survival`, `cozy farming`). If `open` or no argument, start from
-   scratch. Also resolve the review mode (once, store for all gate spawns this run):
-   1. If `--review [full|lean|solo]` was passed → use that
-   2. Else read `production/review-mode.txt` → use that value
-   3. Else → default to `lean`
-
-   See `.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern.
+   scratch.
 
 2. **Check for existing concept work**:
    - Read `design/gdd/game-concept.md` if it exists (resume, don't restart)
@@ -109,6 +186,13 @@ For each concept, present:
 
 Present all three. Then use `AskUserQuestion` to capture the selection.
 
+**This decision asks regardless of `modes.automation`.** Concept selection
+is the creative heart of `/brainstorm` and has no defensible autonomous
+default — there is no algorithmic way to pick which creative direction
+resonates with the user. Per `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`, treat
+this site as exempt (it overrides the mode the same way
+`automation_always_ask` categories do).
+
 **CRITICAL**: This MUST be a plain list call — no tabs, no form fields. Use exactly this structure:
 
 ```
@@ -195,19 +279,26 @@ If the user selects B, C, or D, make the revision, then use `AskUserQuestion` ag
 - Prompt: "Pillars updated. Ready to lock these in?"
 - Options: `[A] Lock these in` / `[B] Revise another pillar` / `[C] Something else`
 
-Repeat until the user selects [A] Lock these in.
+**At `collaborative`** — repeat until the user selects [A] Lock these in.
+**At `guided`** — pillars are a major decision, so ask once; apply the chosen
+revision and lock them in without a second confirmation round.
+**At `autonomous`** — do not ask. Lock in the drafted pillars and record them via
+`log_decision` with the alternatives considered.
+
+> An `autonomous` run never issues the question, so "repeat until [A]" has no
+> exit condition (`automation-modes.md:56`).
 
 **Review mode check** — apply before spawning CD-PILLARS and AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL:
 - `solo` → skip both. Note: "CD-PILLARS skipped — Solo mode. AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to Phase 5.
 - `lean` → skip both (not PHASE-GATEs). Note: "CD-PILLARS skipped — Lean mode. AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to Phase 5.
 - `full` → spawn as normal.
 
-**After pillars and anti-pillars are agreed, spawn BOTH `creative-director` AND `art-director` via Task in parallel before moving to Phase 5. Issue both Task calls simultaneously — do not wait for one before starting the other.**
+**After pillars and anti-pillars are agreed, spawn BOTH `creative-director` AND `art-director` via `Agent` in parallel before moving to Phase 5. Issue both `Agent` calls simultaneously — do not wait for one before starting the other.**
 
-- **`creative-director`** — gate **CD-PILLARS** (`.claude/docs/director-gates.md`)
+- **`creative-director`** — gate **CD-PILLARS** (`.claude/docs/director-gates/cd-pillars.md`)
   Pass: full pillar set with design tests, anti-pillars, core fantasy, unique hook.
 
-- **`art-director`** — gate **AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL** (`.claude/docs/director-gates.md`)
+- **`art-director`** — gate **AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL** (`.claude/docs/director-gates/ad-concept-visual.md`)
   Pass: game concept elevator pitch, full pillar set with design tests, target platform (if known), any reference games or visual touchstones the user mentioned.
 
 Collect both verdicts, then present them together using a two-tab `AskUserQuestion`:
@@ -246,6 +337,12 @@ Ground the concept in reality:
 
 - **Engine experience**: Use `AskUserQuestion` — "Do you already have an engine you work in?"
   Options: `Godot` / `Unity` / `Unreal Engine 5` / `No preference — help me decide`
+  - **This decision always prompts regardless of `modes.automation` —
+    including `autonomous` mode.** Engine choice is a project-wide
+    architectural commitment that downstream tooling depends on and is
+    effectively irreversible mid-project, so this skill guards it
+    unconditionally (it is NOT left to the configurable
+    `automation_always_ask` list). The model must NOT silently pick an engine.
   - If they pick an engine → record it as their preference and move on. Do NOT second-guess it.
   - If "No preference" → tell them: "Run `/setup-engine` after this session — it will walk you through the full decision based on your concept and platform target." Do not make a recommendation here.
 - **Art pipeline**: What's the art style and how labor-intensive is it?
@@ -260,7 +357,7 @@ Ground the concept in reality:
 - `lean` → skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "TD-FEASIBILITY skipped — Lean mode." Proceed directly to scope tier definition.
 - `full` → spawn as normal.
 
-**After identifying biggest technical risks, spawn `technical-director` via Task using gate TD-FEASIBILITY (`.claude/docs/director-gates.md`) before scope tiers are defined.**
+**After identifying biggest technical risks, spawn `technical-director` via `Agent` using gate TD-FEASIBILITY (`.claude/docs/director-gates/td-feasibility.md`) before scope tiers are defined.**
 
 Pass: core loop description, platform target, engine choice (or "undecided"), list of identified technical risks.
 
@@ -271,7 +368,7 @@ Present the assessment to the user. If HIGH RISK, offer to revisit scope before
 - `lean` → skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "PR-SCOPE skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to document generation.
 - `full` → spawn as normal.
 
-**After scope tiers are defined, spawn `producer` via Task using gate PR-SCOPE (`.claude/docs/director-gates.md`).**
+**After scope tiers are defined, spawn `producer` via `Agent` using gate PR-SCOPE (`.claude/docs/director-gates/pr-scope.md`).**
 
 Pass: full vision scope, MVP definition, timeline estimate, team size.
 
@@ -301,7 +398,13 @@ If [B]: ask which section to revise using `AskUserQuestion` with options: `Eleva
 
 After revising, show the updated section as a diff or clear before/after, then use `AskUserQuestion` — "Ready to write the updated concept document?"
 Options: `[A] Yes — write it` / `[B] Revise another section`
-Repeat until the user selects [A].
+**At `collaborative`** — repeat until the user selects [A].
+**At `guided`** — ask once; apply the requested revision and write the document
+without a further confirmation round.
+**At `autonomous`** — do not ask; write the document and record the decision via
+`log_decision`.
+
+> Same exit-condition problem as the pillars loop above (`automation-modes.md:56`).
 
 If yes, generate the document using the template at `.claude/docs/templates/game-concept.md`, fill in ALL sections from the brainstorm conversation, and write the file, creating directories as needed.