Claude-Code-Game-Studios/CCGS Skill Testing Framework/agents/specialists/world-builder.md

Agent Test Spec: world-builder

Agent Summary

• Domain: World lore architecture — factions and their cultures/governments/motivations, world history, geography and ecology, cosmology and metaphysics, world rules (how magic works, what is and is not possible), internal consistency enforcement across the world document
• Does NOT own: Specific NPC or quest dialogue (writer), game mechanics rules derived from world rules (game-designer/systems-designer), narrative story structure and arc design (narrative-director)
• Gate IDs: None; escalates world rule/mechanic conflicts to narrative-director and game-designer jointly

---

Static Assertions (Structural)

• description: field is present and domain-specific (references world lore, factions, history, world rules, ecology)
• tools: reads Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit and disallowedTools: lists Bash — document authoring only, no shell or code execution
• Model tier is inherit — frontmatter model: reads exactly inherit (tiers: .claude/docs/model-tiers.md)
• Agent definition does not claim authority over dialogue writing, mechanic design, or narrative arc structure

---

Test Cases

Case 1: In-domain request — faction culture and government design

Input: "Design the Ironveil Merchant Consortium — a powerful trading faction in our world. I need their culture, government structure, and internal motivations." Expected behavior:

• Before drafting, asks clarifying questions and presents 2-4 options for the government model (e.g., council of founding houses, elected chair, shareholder-weighted vote) with pros/cons and a recommendation, deferring the choice to the user
• Produces a faction profile with: motivations (what they want and why), power structure (how decisions are made, who holds power, succession or appointment), relationships to other factions (allies, rivals, neutral parties), territories, player-facing personality, and cultural details (customs, beliefs, daily life)
• The faction is internally consistent: a merchant consortium's government is driven by economic logic, not feudal or religious logic, unless a deliberate hybrid is specified
• The entry carries the Lore Document Standard fields: Canon Level, Visible To Player, Cross-References, Contradictions Check, Source
• Formatted as a structured faction profile, not a narrative essay; asks "May I create [filepath] with the section skeleton?" before creating the file and "May I write this section to [filepath]?" before writing each section

Case 2: Out-of-domain request — dialogue writing

Input: "Write the dialogue for a Ironveil Consortium merchant NPC that the player meets at the city gates." Expected behavior:

• Does not produce NPC dialogue
• States that dialogue writing is owned by writer, and that its own part is the world and faction context that informs the dialogue — the faction's culture, tone and speaking style
• Offers to produce the faction's cultural details — customs, beliefs, language fragments, daily life — that writer would need to write consistent dialogue

Case 3: New lore entry contradicts established history — conflict flagging

Input: "Add a lore entry stating the Ironveil Consortium was founded 50 years ago by a single merchant family." [Context includes existing lore: the Consortium has existed for 300 years and was founded as a collective by 12 rival trading houses.] Expected behavior:

• Identifies the contradiction: existing lore states 300-year history and a founding coalition of 12 houses; the new entry claims 50 years and a single founding family
• Does NOT write the new entry as requested
• Flags the conflict: states both versions, identifies which is established and which is the proposed change
• Proposes resolution options: (a) the new entry is wrong and should be corrected; (b) the existing lore should be updated if the new version is the intended canon; (c) there is an in-world explanation (the current family claims founding credit despite the collective origin — a deliberate unreliable narrator, with the truth documented separately)
• Does not apply option (b) on its own: changing established canon requires narrative-director approval

Case 4: World rule has gameplay implications — coordination with game-designer

Input: "I want to establish a world rule: magic users who cast spells near iron ore are weakened. Iron disrupts arcane energy." Expected behavior:

• Produces the world rule as a lore entry: the metaphysical explanation, how it is understood in-world, historical implications
• Identifies the gameplay implication: this world rule has direct mechanical consequences (players near iron ore deposits are debuffed, level design must account for iron placement)
• Flags the coordination requirement: "This world rule has gameplay mechanics implications — game-designer needs to define how this translates into player-facing mechanics; proceeding with the lore without the mechanics definition risks inconsistency"
• Does NOT unilaterally design the game mechanic — describes the lore rule and the mechanical territory it implies, then defers to game-designer

Case 5: Context pass — using established world documents

Input context: Existing world document states: the world uses a dual-sun system, one sun is the source of arcane energy (the White Sun), and arcane magic ceases to function during the 3-day lunar eclipse period (the Darkening). Input: "Add a lore entry about the Mages' College and how they prepare for the Darkening." Expected behavior:

• Uses the established dual-sun cosmology: references the White Sun as the source of arcane energy
• Uses the established Darkening event: 3-day eclipse, magic ceases
• Does NOT invent a different eclipse mechanism, duration, or name
• Produces a lore entry where the Mages' College's Darkening preparations are consistent with the established rules: they cannot cast during the Darkening, so preparations are practical (stockpiling non-magical supplies, scheduling, shutting down ongoing magical processes)
• Does not contradict any established fact from the context document

---

Protocol Compliance

• Stays within declared domain (factions, world history, geography, ecology, world rules, cosmology)
• Redirects dialogue writing requests to writer with contextual faction notes
• Flags lore contradictions with both versions stated and resolution options offered — does not silently overwrite established lore
• Identifies gameplay implications of world rules and flags coordination with game-designer
• Uses all established world facts from context; does not invent alternatives to stated lore

---

Coverage Notes

• Case 3 (contradiction detection) requires existing lore to be in context — this is the most important consistency test
• Case 4 (world rule/mechanic coordination) tests cross-domain awareness; verify the agent identifies the mechanic boundary without crossing it
• Case 5 is the most important context-awareness test; the agent must use established facts, not creative alternatives
• No automated runner; review manually or via /skill-test