mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-06-27 13:01:50 +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>
206 lines
7.0 KiB
Markdown
206 lines
7.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
name: content-audit
|
||
description: "Audit GDD-specified content counts against implemented content. Identifies what's planned vs built."
|
||
argument-hint: "[system-name | --summary | (no arg = full audit)]"
|
||
user-invocable: true
|
||
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write
|
||
model: sonnet
|
||
agent: producer
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
When this skill is invoked:
|
||
|
||
Parse the argument:
|
||
- No argument → full audit across all systems
|
||
- `[system-name]` → audit that single system only
|
||
- `--summary` → summary table only, no file write
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phase 1 — Context Gathering
|
||
|
||
1. **Read `design/gdd/systems-index.md`** for the full list of systems, their
|
||
categories, and MVP/priority tier.
|
||
|
||
2. **L0 pre-scan**: Before full-reading any GDDs, Grep all GDD files for
|
||
`## Summary` sections plus common content-count keywords:
|
||
```
|
||
Grep pattern="(## Summary|N enemies|N levels|N items|N abilities|enemy types|item types)" glob="design/gdd/*.md" output_mode="files_with_matches"
|
||
```
|
||
For a single-system audit: skip this step and go straight to full-read.
|
||
For a full audit: full-read only the GDDs that matched content-count keywords.
|
||
GDDs with no content-count language (pure mechanics GDDs) are noted as
|
||
"No auditable content counts" without a full read.
|
||
|
||
3. **Full-read in-scope GDD files** (or the single system GDD if a system
|
||
name was given).
|
||
|
||
4. **For each GDD, extract explicit content counts or lists.** Look for patterns
|
||
like:
|
||
- "N enemies" / "enemy types:" / list of named enemies
|
||
- "N levels" / "N areas" / "N maps" / "N stages"
|
||
- "N items" / "N weapons" / "N equipment pieces"
|
||
- "N abilities" / "N skills" / "N spells"
|
||
- "N dialogue scenes" / "N conversations" / "N cutscenes"
|
||
- "N quests" / "N missions" / "N objectives"
|
||
- Any explicit enumerated list (bullet list of named content pieces)
|
||
|
||
4. **Build a content inventory table** from the extracted data:
|
||
|
||
| System | Content Type | Specified Count/List | Source GDD |
|
||
|--------|-------------|---------------------|------------|
|
||
|
||
Note: If a GDD describes content qualitatively but gives no count, record
|
||
"Unspecified" and flag it — unspecified counts are a design gap worth noting.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phase 2 — Implementation Scan
|
||
|
||
For each content type found in Phase 1, scan the relevant directories to count
|
||
what has been implemented. Use Glob and Grep to locate files.
|
||
|
||
**Levels / Areas / Maps:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/**/*.tscn`, `assets/**/*.unity`, `assets/**/*.umap`
|
||
- Glob `src/**/*.tscn`, `src/**/*.unity`
|
||
- Look for scene files in subdirectories named `levels/`, `areas/`, `maps/`,
|
||
`worlds/`, `stages/`
|
||
- Count unique files that appear to be level/scene definitions (not UI scenes)
|
||
|
||
**Enemies / Characters / NPCs:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/data/**/enemies/**`, `assets/data/**/characters/**`
|
||
- Glob `src/**/enemies/**`, `src/**/characters/**`
|
||
- Look for `.json`, `.tres`, `.asset`, `.yaml` data files defining entity stats
|
||
- Look for scene/prefab files in character subdirectories
|
||
|
||
**Items / Equipment / Loot:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/data/**/items/**`, `assets/data/**/equipment/**`,
|
||
`assets/data/**/loot/**`
|
||
- Look for `.json`, `.tres`, `.asset` data files
|
||
|
||
**Abilities / Skills / Spells:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/data/**/abilities/**`, `assets/data/**/skills/**`,
|
||
`assets/data/**/spells/**`
|
||
- Look for `.json`, `.tres`, `.asset` data files
|
||
|
||
**Dialogue / Conversations / Cutscenes:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/**/*.dialogue`, `assets/**/*.csv`, `assets/**/*.ink`
|
||
- Grep for dialogue data files in `assets/data/`
|
||
|
||
**Quests / Missions:**
|
||
- Glob `assets/data/**/quests/**`, `assets/data/**/missions/**`
|
||
- Look for `.json`, `.yaml` definition files
|
||
|
||
**Engine-specific notes (acknowledge in the report):**
|
||
- Counts are approximations — the skill cannot perfectly parse every engine
|
||
format or distinguish editor-only files from shipped content
|
||
- Scene files may include both gameplay content and system/UI scenes; the scan
|
||
counts all matches and notes this caveat
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phase 3 — Gap Report
|
||
|
||
Produce the gap table:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
| System | Content Type | Specified | Found | Gap | Status |
|
||
|--------|-------------|-----------|-------|-----|--------|
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**Status categories:**
|
||
- `COMPLETE` — Found ≥ Specified (100%+)
|
||
- `IN PROGRESS` — Found is 50–99% of Specified
|
||
- `EARLY` — Found is 1–49% of Specified
|
||
- `NOT STARTED` — Found is 0
|
||
|
||
**Priority flags:**
|
||
Flag a system as `HIGH PRIORITY` in the report if:
|
||
- Status is `NOT STARTED` or `EARLY`, AND
|
||
- The system is tagged MVP or Vertical Slice in the systems index, OR
|
||
- The systems index shows the system is blocking downstream systems
|
||
|
||
**Summary line:**
|
||
- Total content items specified (sum of all Specified column values)
|
||
- Total content items found (sum of all Found column values)
|
||
- Overall gap percentage: `(Specified - Found) / Specified * 100`
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phase 4 — Output
|
||
|
||
### Full audit and single-system modes
|
||
|
||
Present the gap table and summary to the user. Ask: "May I write the full report to `docs/content-audit-[YYYY-MM-DD].md`?"
|
||
|
||
If yes, write the file:
|
||
|
||
```markdown
|
||
# Content Audit — [Date]
|
||
|
||
## Summary
|
||
- **Total specified**: [N] content items across [M] systems
|
||
- **Total found**: [N]
|
||
- **Gap**: [N] items ([X%] unimplemented)
|
||
- **Scope**: [Full audit | System: name]
|
||
|
||
> Note: Counts are approximations based on file scanning.
|
||
> The audit cannot distinguish shipped content from editor/test assets.
|
||
> Manual verification is recommended for any HIGH PRIORITY gaps.
|
||
|
||
## Gap Table
|
||
|
||
| System | Content Type | Specified | Found | Gap | Status |
|
||
|--------|-------------|-----------|-------|-----|--------|
|
||
|
||
## HIGH PRIORITY Gaps
|
||
|
||
[List systems flagged HIGH PRIORITY with rationale]
|
||
|
||
## Per-System Breakdown
|
||
|
||
### [System Name]
|
||
- **GDD**: `design/gdd/[file].md`
|
||
- **Content types audited**: [list]
|
||
- **Notes**: [any caveats about scan accuracy for this system]
|
||
|
||
## Recommendation
|
||
|
||
Focus implementation effort on:
|
||
1. [Highest-gap HIGH PRIORITY system]
|
||
2. [Second system]
|
||
3. [Third system]
|
||
|
||
## Unspecified Content Counts
|
||
|
||
The following GDDs describe content without giving explicit counts.
|
||
Consider adding counts to improve auditability:
|
||
[List of GDDs and content types with "Unspecified"]
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
After writing the report, ask:
|
||
|
||
> "Would you like to create backlog stories for any of the content gaps?"
|
||
|
||
If yes: for each system the user selects, suggest a story title and point them
|
||
to `/create-stories [epic-slug]` or `/quick-design` depending on the size of the gap.
|
||
|
||
### --summary mode
|
||
|
||
Print the Gap Table and Summary directly to conversation. Do not write a file.
|
||
End with: "Run `/content-audit` without `--summary` to write the full report."
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Phase 5 — Next Steps
|
||
|
||
After the audit, recommend the highest-value follow-up actions:
|
||
|
||
- If any system is `NOT STARTED` and MVP-tagged → "Run `/design-system [name]` to
|
||
add missing content counts to the GDD before implementation begins."
|
||
- If total gap is >50% → "Run `/sprint-plan` to allocate content work across upcoming sprints."
|
||
- If backlog stories are needed → "Run `/create-stories [epic-slug]` for each HIGH PRIORITY gap."
|
||
- If `--summary` was used → "Run `/content-audit` (no flag) to write the full report to `docs/`."
|
||
|
||
Verdict: **COMPLETE** — content audit finished.
|