* 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>
9.0 KiB
name, description, argument-hint, user-invocable, allowed-tools, model
| name | description | argument-hint | user-invocable | allowed-tools | model |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| regression-suite | Map test coverage to GDD critical paths, identify fixed bugs without regression tests, flag coverage drift from new features, and maintain tests/regression-suite.md. Run after implementing a bug fix or before a release gate. | [update | audit | report] | true | Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, AskUserQuestion | sonnet |
Regression Suite
This skill ensures that every bug fix is backed by a test that would have caught the original bug — and that the regression suite stays current as the game evolves. It also detects when new features have been added without corresponding regression coverage.
A regression suite is not a new test category — it is a curated list of
tests already in tests/ that collectively cover the game's critical paths
and known failure points. This skill maintains that list.
Output: tests/regression-suite.md
When to run:
- After fixing a bug (confirm a regression test was written or identify gap)
- Before a release gate (
/gate-check polishrequires regression suite exists) - As part of sprint close to detect coverage drift
1. Parse Arguments
Modes:
/regression-suite update— scan new bug fixes this sprint and check for regression test presence; add new tests to the suite manifest/regression-suite audit— full audit of all GDD critical paths vs. existing test coverage; flag paths with no regression test/regression-suite report— read-only status report (no writes); suitable for sprint reviews- No argument — if a sprint is clearly active (sprint plan exists with in-progress stories), run
update. If ambiguous or no active sprint is detected, useAskUserQuestion:- Prompt: "No subcommand specified. Which mode do you want to run?"
- Options:
[A] update — scan new bug fixes this sprint and add missing regression tests[B] audit — full audit of all GDD critical paths vs. existing test coverage[C] report — read-only status report (no writes)
2. Load Context
Step 2a — Load existing regression suite
Read tests/regression-suite.md if it exists. Extract:
- Total registered regression tests
- Last updated date
- Any tests flagged as
STALEorQUARANTINED
If it does not exist: note "No regression suite found — will create one."
Step 2b — Load test inventory
Glob all test files:
tests/unit/**/*_test.*
tests/integration/**/*_test.*
tests/regression/**/*
For each file, note the system (from directory path) and file name. Do not read test file contents unless needed for name-to-test mapping.
Step 2c — Load GDD critical paths
For audit mode: read design/gdd/systems-index.md to get all systems.
For each MVP-tier system, read its GDD and extract:
- Acceptance Criteria (these define the critical paths)
- Formulas section (formulas must have regression tests)
- Edge Cases section (known edge cases should have regression tests)
For update mode: skip full GDD scan. Instead read the current sprint plan
and story files to find stories with Status: Complete this sprint.
Step 2d — Load closed bugs
Glob production/qa/bugs/*.md and filter for bugs with a Status: Closed
or Status: Fixed field. Note:
- Which story or system the bug was in
- Whether a regression test was mentioned in the fix description
3. Map Coverage — Critical Paths
For audit mode only:
For each GDD acceptance criterion, determine whether a test exists:
- Grep
tests/unit/[system]/andtests/integration/[system]/for file names and function names related to the criterion's key noun/verb - Assign coverage:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| COVERED | A test file exists that targets this criterion's logic |
| PARTIAL | A test exists but doesn't cover all cases (e.g. happy path only) |
| MISSING | No test found for this critical path |
| EXEMPT | Visual/Feel or UI criterion — not automatable by design |
- Elevate MISSING items that correspond to formulas or state machines to HIGH PRIORITY gap — these are the most likely regression sources.
4. Map Coverage — Fixed Bugs
For each closed bug:
- Extract the system slug from the bug's metadata
- Grep
tests/unit/[system]/andtests/integration/[system]/for a test that references the bug ID or the specific failure scenario - Assign:
- HAS REGRESSION TEST — a test was found that would catch this bug
- MISSING REGRESSION TEST — bug was fixed but no test guards against recurrence
For MISSING REGRESSION TEST items:
- Flag them as regression gaps
- Suggest the test file path:
tests/unit/[system]/[bug-slug]_regression_test.[ext] - Note: "Without this test, this bug can silently return in a future sprint."
5. Detect Coverage Drift
Coverage drift occurs when the game grows but the regression suite doesn't.
Check for drift indicators:
- Stories completed this sprint with no corresponding test files in
tests/ - New systems added to
systems-index.mdsince the last regression-suite update - GDD sections added or revised since the regression suite was last updated (use Grep on GDD file modification hints if available, or ask the user)
tests/regression-suite.mdlast-updated date vs. current date — if gap > 2 sprints, flag as likely stale
6. Generate Report and Suite Manifest
Report format (in conversation)
## Regression Suite Status
**Mode**: [update | audit | report]
**Existing registered tests**: [N]
**Test files scanned**: [N]
### Critical Path Coverage (audit mode only)
| System | Total ACs | Covered | Partial | Missing | Exempt |
|--------|-----------|---------|---------|---------|--------|
| [name] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] |
**Coverage rate (non-exempt)**: [N]%
### Bug Regression Coverage
| Bug ID | System | Severity | Has Regression Test? |
|--------|--------|----------|----------------------|
| BUG-NNN | [system] | S[N] | YES / NO ⚠ |
**Bugs without regression tests**: [N]
### Coverage Drift Indicators
[List new systems or stories with no test coverage, or "None detected."]
### Recommended New Regression Tests
| Priority | System | Suggested Test File | Covers |
|----------|--------|---------------------|--------|
| HIGH | [system] | `tests/unit/[system]/[slug]_regression_test.[ext]` | BUG-NNN / AC-[N] |
| MEDIUM | [system] | `tests/unit/[system]/[slug]_test.[ext]` | [criterion] |
Suite manifest format (tests/regression-suite.md)
The manifest is a curated index — not the tests themselves, but a registry of which tests should always pass before a release:
# Regression Suite Manifest
> Last Updated: [date]
> Total registered tests: [N]
> Coverage: [N]% of GDD critical paths
## How to run
[Engine-specific command to run all regression tests]
## Registered Regression Tests
### [System Name]
| Test File | Test Function (if known) | Covers | Added |
|-----------|--------------------------|--------|-------|
| `tests/unit/[system]/[file]_test.[ext]` | `test_[scenario]` | AC-N / BUG-NNN | [date] |
## Known Gaps
Tests that should exist but don't yet:
| Priority | System | Suggested Path | Covers | Reason Not Yet Written |
|----------|--------|----------------|--------|------------------------|
| HIGH | [system] | `tests/unit/[system]/[path]` | BUG-NNN | Bug fixed without test |
## Quarantined Tests
Tests that are flaky or disabled (do not run in CI):
| Test File | Function | Reason | Quarantined Since |
|-----------|----------|--------|-------------------|
| (none) | | | |
7. Write Output
Ask: "May I write/update tests/regression-suite.md with the current
regression suite manifest?"
For update mode: append new entries; never remove existing entries
(use Edit with targeted insertions).
For audit mode: rewrite the full manifest with updated coverage data.
For report mode: do not write anything.
After writing (if approved):
- For each HIGH priority gap: "Consider creating the missing regression test
before the next sprint. Run
/test-helpersto scaffold the test file." - If bug regression gaps > 0: "These bugs can silently return without regression tests. The next sprint should include a story to write the missing tests."
- If coverage drift detected: "Regression suite may be drifting. Consider
running
/regression-suite auditat the next sprint boundary."
Verdict: COMPLETE — regression suite updated. (If user declined write: Verdict: BLOCKED.)
Collaborative Protocol
- Never remove existing regression tests from the manifest without explicit user approval — removing a test that was deliberately written is a regression risk itself
- Gaps are advisory, not blocking — surface them clearly but do not prevent other work from proceeding (except at release gate where regression suite is required)
- Quarantine is not deletion — tests with intermittent failures should be
quarantined (noted in manifest) but not removed; they should be fixed by
/test-flakiness - Ask before writing — always confirm before creating or updating the manifest