mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-06-27 04:51:46 +00:00
* 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>
181 lines
6.2 KiB
Markdown
181 lines
6.2 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: hotfix
|
|
description: "Emergency fix workflow that bypasses normal sprint processes with a full audit trail. Creates hotfix branch, tracks approvals, and ensures the fix is backported correctly."
|
|
argument-hint: "[bug-id or description]"
|
|
user-invocable: true
|
|
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion
|
|
model: sonnet
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
> **Explicit invocation only**: This skill should only run when the user explicitly requests it with `/hotfix`. Do not auto-invoke based on context matching.
|
|
|
|
## Phase 1: Assess Severity
|
|
|
|
Read the bug description or ID. Assess severity using these criteria:
|
|
|
|
- **S1 (Critical)**: Game unplayable, data loss, security vulnerability
|
|
- **S2 (Major)**: Significant feature broken, workaround exists
|
|
- **S3 or lower**: Minor issue — normal bug fix workflow applies
|
|
|
|
Confirm with `AskUserQuestion`:
|
|
- Prompt: "I've assessed this as **[assessed severity]** — [brief rationale]. Confirm severity to proceed:"
|
|
- Options:
|
|
- `[A] S1 (Critical) — game unplayable, data loss, or security issue`
|
|
- `[B] S2 (Major) — significant feature broken, workaround exists`
|
|
- `[C] S3 or lower — redirect to normal bug fix workflow`
|
|
|
|
If [C]: stop. Verdict: **REDIRECTED** — use the normal bug fix workflow for S3 and below.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 2: Create Hotfix Record
|
|
|
|
Draft the hotfix record:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Hotfix: [Short Description]
|
|
Date: [Date]
|
|
Severity: [S1/S2]
|
|
Reporter: [Who found it]
|
|
Status: IN PROGRESS
|
|
|
|
### Problem
|
|
[Clear description of what is broken and the player impact]
|
|
|
|
### Root Cause
|
|
[To be filled during investigation]
|
|
|
|
### Fix
|
|
[To be filled during implementation]
|
|
|
|
### Testing
|
|
[What was tested and how]
|
|
|
|
### Approvals
|
|
- [ ] Fix reviewed by lead-programmer
|
|
- [ ] Regression test passed (qa-tester)
|
|
- [ ] Release approved (producer)
|
|
|
|
### Rollback Plan
|
|
[How to revert if the fix causes new issues]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Ask: "May I write this to `production/hotfixes/hotfix-[date]-[short-name].md`?"
|
|
|
|
If yes, write the file, creating the directory if needed.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 3: Create Hotfix Branch
|
|
|
|
Check whether this is a git repository:
|
|
|
|
`Bash: git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null`
|
|
|
|
If this command fails or returns empty: note "Not a git repository — create the branch manually." and skip branch creation.
|
|
|
|
If the check passes, use `AskUserQuestion` before creating the branch:
|
|
- Prompt: "Ready to create hotfix branch 'hotfix/[short-name]' from [base-ref]?"
|
|
- Options:
|
|
- `[A] Yes — create branch`
|
|
- `[B] Use a different base ref — I'll specify it`
|
|
- `[C] Skip — I'll create the branch myself`
|
|
|
|
Only run `git checkout -b hotfix/[short-name] [base-ref]` if user selects [A]. If [B]: ask the user for the base ref, then run the command with that ref. If [C]: skip branch creation and proceed to Phase 4.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 4: Investigate and Implement
|
|
|
|
Focus on the minimal change that resolves the issue. Do NOT refactor, clean up, or add features alongside the hotfix.
|
|
|
|
Validate the fix by running targeted tests for the affected system. Check for regressions in adjacent systems.
|
|
|
|
Update the hotfix record with root cause, fix details, and test results.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 5: Collect Approvals
|
|
|
|
Use the Task tool to request sign-off in parallel:
|
|
|
|
- `subagent_type: lead-programmer` — Review the fix for correctness and side effects
|
|
- `subagent_type: qa-tester` — Run targeted regression tests on the affected system
|
|
- `subagent_type: producer` — Approve deployment timing and communication plan
|
|
|
|
All three must return APPROVE before proceeding. If any returns CONCERNS or REJECT, do not deploy — surface the issue and resolve it first.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 5b: QA Re-Entry Gate
|
|
|
|
After approvals, determine the QA scope required before deploying the hotfix. Spawn `qa-lead` via Task with:
|
|
- The hotfix description and affected system
|
|
- The regression test results from Phase 5
|
|
- A list of all systems that touch the changed files (use Grep to find callers)
|
|
|
|
Ask qa-lead: **Is a full smoke check sufficient, or does this fix require a targeted team-qa pass?**
|
|
|
|
Apply the verdict:
|
|
- **Smoke check sufficient** — run `/smoke-check` against the hotfix build. If PASS, proceed to Phase 6.
|
|
- **Targeted QA pass required** — run `/team-qa [affected-system]` scoped to the changed system only. If QA returns APPROVED or APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, proceed to Phase 6.
|
|
- **Full QA required** — S1 fixes that touch core systems may require a full `/team-qa sprint`. This delays deployment but prevents a bad patch.
|
|
|
|
Do not skip this gate. A hotfix that breaks something else is worse than the original bug.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 6: Update Bug Status and Deploy
|
|
|
|
Update the original bug file if one exists:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Fix Record
|
|
**Fixed in**: hotfix/[branch-name] — [commit hash or description]
|
|
**Fixed date**: [date]
|
|
**Status**: Fixed — Pending Verification
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Set `**Status**: Fixed — Pending Verification` in the bug file header.
|
|
|
|
Output a deployment summary:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
## Hotfix Ready to Deploy: [short-name]
|
|
|
|
**Severity**: [S1/S2]
|
|
**Root cause**: [one line]
|
|
**Fix**: [one line]
|
|
**QA gate**: [Smoke check PASS / Team-QA APPROVED]
|
|
**Approvals**: lead-programmer ✓ / qa-tester ✓ / producer ✓
|
|
**Rollback plan**: [from Phase 2 record]
|
|
|
|
Merge to: release branch AND development branch
|
|
Next: /bug-report verify [BUG-ID] after deploy to confirm resolution
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Rules
|
|
- Hotfixes must be the MINIMUM change to fix the issue — no cleanup, no refactoring
|
|
- Every hotfix must have a rollback plan documented before deployment
|
|
- Hotfix branches merge to BOTH the release branch AND the development branch
|
|
- All hotfixes require a post-incident review within 48 hours
|
|
- If the fix is complex enough to need more than 4 hours, escalate to `technical-director`
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phase 7: Post-Deploy Verification
|
|
|
|
After deploying, run `/bug-report verify [BUG-ID]` to confirm the fix resolved the issue in the deployed build.
|
|
|
|
If VERIFIED FIXED: run `/bug-report close [BUG-ID]` to formally close it.
|
|
If STILL PRESENT: the hotfix failed — immediately re-open, assess rollback, and escalate.
|
|
|
|
Schedule a post-incident review within 48 hours using `/retrospective hotfix`.
|
|
|
|
Use `AskUserQuestion`:
|
|
- Prompt: "Hotfix complete. What's the next step?"
|
|
- Options:
|
|
- `[A] Run /smoke-check to verify the fix`
|
|
- `[B] Run /patch-notes to document this hotfix`
|
|
- `[C] Stop here`
|