mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-06-27 04:51:46 +00:00
## New Skills (9) - /quick-design: lightweight spec path for small changes (bypasses full GDD pipeline) - /story-readiness: validates stories are implementation-ready before pickup - /story-done: end-of-story completion review (criteria verification, deviation check, status update) - /sprint-status: fast 30-line sprint snapshot, read-only - /ux-design: guided section-by-section UX spec authoring (screen/flow/HUD/patterns) - /ux-review: UX spec validation with APPROVED/NEEDS REVISION/MAJOR REVISION verdict - /architecture-review, /create-architecture, /create-control-manifest, /create-epics-stories, /propagate-design-change, /review-all-gdds (pipeline completion) ## New Templates (7) - player-journey.md: 6-phase emotional arc, critical moments, retention hooks - difficulty-curve.md: difficulty axes, onboarding ramp, cross-system interactions - ux-spec.md: per-screen UX spec with states, interaction map, data requirements, events - hud-design.md: whole-game HUD with philosophy, info architecture, element specs - accessibility-requirements.md: project-wide accessibility tier commitment and audit - interaction-pattern-library.md: 26 standard + game-specific patterns with full state specs - architecture-traceability.md: GDD requirements to ADR coverage matrix ## Updated Skills & Templates - gate-check: Vertical Slice hard gate, playtesting strengthened, UX artifacts required - team-ui: full UX pipeline integration (/ux-design + /ux-review + accessibility-specialist) - game-design-document: Game Feel section (input latency, animation frames, impact moments) - implementation-agent-protocol: /story-done as explicit final step of every story - architecture-decision, design-system: pipeline completion updates Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
203 lines
6.3 KiB
Markdown
203 lines
6.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: architecture-decision
|
|
description: "Creates an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) documenting a significant technical decision, its context, alternatives considered, and consequences. Every major technical choice should have an ADR."
|
|
argument-hint: "[title]"
|
|
user-invocable: true
|
|
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
When this skill is invoked:
|
|
|
|
## 0. Load Engine Context (ALWAYS FIRST)
|
|
|
|
Before doing anything else, establish the engine environment:
|
|
|
|
1. Read `docs/engine-reference/[engine]/VERSION.md` to get:
|
|
- Engine name and version
|
|
- LLM knowledge cutoff date
|
|
- Post-cutoff version risk levels (LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH)
|
|
|
|
2. Identify the **domain** of this architecture decision from the title or
|
|
user description. Common domains: Physics, Rendering, UI, Audio, Navigation,
|
|
Animation, Networking, Core, Input, Scripting.
|
|
|
|
3. Read the corresponding module reference if it exists:
|
|
`docs/engine-reference/[engine]/modules/[domain].md`
|
|
|
|
4. Read `docs/engine-reference/[engine]/breaking-changes.md` — flag any
|
|
changes in the relevant domain that post-date the LLM's training cutoff.
|
|
|
|
5. Read `docs/engine-reference/[engine]/deprecated-apis.md` — flag any APIs
|
|
in the relevant domain that should not be used.
|
|
|
|
6. **Display a knowledge gap warning** before proceeding if the domain carries
|
|
MEDIUM or HIGH risk:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
⚠️ ENGINE KNOWLEDGE GAP WARNING
|
|
Engine: [name + version]
|
|
Domain: [domain]
|
|
Risk Level: HIGH — This version is post-LLM-cutoff.
|
|
|
|
Key changes verified from engine-reference docs:
|
|
- [Change 1 relevant to this domain]
|
|
- [Change 2]
|
|
|
|
This ADR will be cross-referenced against the engine reference library.
|
|
Proceed with verified information only — do NOT rely solely on training data.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If no engine has been configured yet, prompt: "No engine is configured.
|
|
Run `/setup-engine` first, or tell me which engine you are using."
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 1. Determine the next ADR number
|
|
|
|
Scan `docs/architecture/` for existing ADRs to find the next number.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 2. Gather context
|
|
|
|
Read related code, existing ADRs, and relevant GDDs from `design/gdd/`.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 3. Guide the decision collaboratively
|
|
|
|
Ask clarifying questions if the title alone is not sufficient. For each major
|
|
section, present 2-4 options with pros/cons before drafting. Do not generate
|
|
the ADR until the key decision is confirmed by the user.
|
|
|
|
Key questions to ask:
|
|
- What problem are we solving? What breaks if we don't decide this now?
|
|
- What constraints apply (engine version, platform, performance budget)?
|
|
- What alternatives have you already considered?
|
|
- Which post-cutoff engine features (if any) does this decision depend on?
|
|
- **Which GDD systems motivated this decision?** For each, what specific
|
|
requirement (rule, formula, performance constraint, integration point) in
|
|
that GDD cannot be satisfied without this architectural decision?
|
|
|
|
If the decision is foundational (no GDD drives it directly), ask:
|
|
- Which GDD systems will this decision constrain or enable?
|
|
|
|
This GDD linkage becomes a mandatory "GDD Requirements Addressed" section
|
|
in the ADR. Do not skip it.
|
|
|
|
**Does this ADR have ordering constraints?** Ask:
|
|
- Does this decision depend on any other ADR that isn't yet Accepted? (If
|
|
so, this ADR cannot be safely implemented until that one is resolved.)
|
|
- Does accepting this ADR unlock or unblock any other pending decisions?
|
|
- Does this ADR block any specific epic or story from starting?
|
|
|
|
Record the answers in the **ADR Dependencies** section. If no ordering
|
|
constraints exist, write "None" in each field.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 4. Generate the ADR
|
|
|
|
Following this format:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# ADR-[NNNN]: [Title]
|
|
|
|
## Status
|
|
[Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded by ADR-XXXX]
|
|
|
|
## Date
|
|
[Date of decision]
|
|
|
|
## Engine Compatibility
|
|
|
|
| Field | Value |
|
|
|-------|-------|
|
|
| **Engine** | [e.g. Godot 4.6] |
|
|
| **Domain** | [Physics / Rendering / UI / Audio / Navigation / Animation / Networking / Core / Input] |
|
|
| **Knowledge Risk** | [LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH — from VERSION.md] |
|
|
| **References Consulted** | [List engine-reference docs read, e.g. `docs/engine-reference/godot/modules/physics.md`] |
|
|
| **Post-Cutoff APIs Used** | [Any APIs from post-LLM-cutoff versions this decision depends on, or "None"] |
|
|
| **Verification Required** | [Specific behaviours to test before shipping, or "None"] |
|
|
|
|
## ADR Dependencies
|
|
|
|
| Field | Value |
|
|
|-------|-------|
|
|
| **Depends On** | [ADR-NNNN (must be Accepted before this can be implemented), or "None"] |
|
|
| **Enables** | [ADR-NNNN (this ADR unlocks that decision), or "None"] |
|
|
| **Blocks** | [Epic/Story name — cannot start until this ADR is Accepted, or "None"] |
|
|
| **Ordering Note** | [Any sequencing constraint that isn't captured above] |
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
|
|
### Problem Statement
|
|
[What problem are we solving? Why does this decision need to be made now?]
|
|
|
|
### Constraints
|
|
- [Technical constraints]
|
|
- [Timeline constraints]
|
|
- [Resource constraints]
|
|
- [Compatibility requirements]
|
|
|
|
### Requirements
|
|
- [Must support X]
|
|
- [Must perform within Y budget]
|
|
- [Must integrate with Z]
|
|
|
|
## Decision
|
|
|
|
[The specific technical decision made, described in enough detail for someone
|
|
to implement it.]
|
|
|
|
### Architecture Diagram
|
|
[ASCII diagram or description of the system architecture this creates]
|
|
|
|
### Key Interfaces
|
|
[API contracts or interface definitions this decision creates]
|
|
|
|
## Alternatives Considered
|
|
|
|
### Alternative 1: [Name]
|
|
- **Description**: [How this would work]
|
|
- **Pros**: [Advantages]
|
|
- **Cons**: [Disadvantages]
|
|
- **Rejection Reason**: [Why this was not chosen]
|
|
|
|
### Alternative 2: [Name]
|
|
- **Description**: [How this would work]
|
|
- **Pros**: [Advantages]
|
|
- **Cons**: [Disadvantages]
|
|
- **Rejection Reason**: [Why this was not chosen]
|
|
|
|
## Consequences
|
|
|
|
### Positive
|
|
- [Good outcomes of this decision]
|
|
|
|
### Negative
|
|
- [Trade-offs and costs accepted]
|
|
|
|
### Risks
|
|
- [Things that could go wrong]
|
|
- [Mitigation for each risk]
|
|
|
|
## Performance Implications
|
|
- **CPU**: [Expected impact]
|
|
- **Memory**: [Expected impact]
|
|
- **Load Time**: [Expected impact]
|
|
- **Network**: [Expected impact, if applicable]
|
|
|
|
## Migration Plan
|
|
[If this changes existing code, how do we get from here to there?]
|
|
|
|
## Validation Criteria
|
|
[How will we know this decision was correct? What metrics or tests?]
|
|
|
|
## Related Decisions
|
|
- [Links to related ADRs]
|
|
- [Links to related design documents]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
5. **Save the ADR** to `docs/architecture/adr-[NNNN]-[slug].md`.
|