---
name: design-review
description: "Reviews a game design document for completeness, internal consistency, implementability, and adherence to project design standards. Run this before handing a design document to programmers."
argument-hint: "[path-to-design-doc]"
user-invocable: true
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep
---

When this skill is invoked:

1. **Read the target design document** in full.

2. **Read the master CLAUDE.md** to understand project context and standards.

3. **Read related design documents** referenced or implied by the target doc
   (check `design/gdd/` for related systems).

4. **Evaluate against the Design Document Standard checklist**:
   - [ ] Has Overview section (one-paragraph summary)
   - [ ] Has Player Fantasy section (intended feeling)
   - [ ] Has Detailed Rules section (unambiguous mechanics)
   - [ ] Has Formulas section (all math defined with variables)
   - [ ] Has Edge Cases section (unusual situations handled)
   - [ ] Has Dependencies section (other systems listed)
   - [ ] Has Tuning Knobs section (configurable values identified)
   - [ ] Has Acceptance Criteria section (testable success conditions)

5. **Check for internal consistency**:
   - Do the formulas produce values that match the described behavior?
   - Do edge cases contradict the main rules?
   - Are dependencies bidirectional (does the other system know about this one)?

6. **Check for implementability**:
   - Are the rules precise enough for a programmer to implement without guessing?
   - Are there any "hand-wave" sections where details are missing?
   - Are performance implications considered?

7. **Check for cross-system consistency**:
   - Does this conflict with any existing mechanic?
   - Does this create unintended interactions with other systems?
   - Is this consistent with the game's established tone and pillars?

8. **Output the review** in this format:

```
## Design Review: [Document Title]

### Completeness: [X/8 sections present]
[List missing sections]

### Consistency Issues
[List any internal or cross-system contradictions]

### Implementability Concerns
[List any vague or unimplementable sections]

### Balance Concerns
[List any obvious balance risks]

### Recommendations
[Prioritized list of improvements]

### Verdict: [APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION NEEDED]
```