Claude-Code-Game-Studios/CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/authoring/art-bible.md

Skill Test Spec: /art-bible

Skill Summary

/art-bible authors the art bible at design/art/art-bible.md in nine sections: 1 Visual Identity Statement, 2 Mood & Atmosphere, 3 Shape Language, 4 Color System, 5 Character Design Direction, 6 Environment Design Language, 7 UI/HUD Visual Direction, 8 Asset Standards, 9 Reference Direction.

It first reads design/gdd/game-concept.md (or design/game-brief.md at rigor: minimal) and stops if neither exists. A two-tab AskUserQuestion frames the session: Scope (with the option the resolved workflow tier requires marked Recommended) and References (free text). Authoring is progressive: every section's draft comes from a spawned specialist (art-director; plus ux-designer for section 7 and technical-artist for section 8), is presented to the user, approved, and written to the file immediately before the next section starts. Sections 2–4 share one art-director call, as do 5–6, but their approvals and writes stay one section at a time. The first write asks "May I create design/art/art-bible.md from the art bible template?"; each section is written only after an approval whose option names the write ([A] Lock this in and write it to design/art/art-bible.md). Only the sections in the chosen scope are authored, and the close names the sections left out and why.

If the file already exists, the skill builds a section status table from two Greps (headings and placeholder markers) without reading the document, and authors only Empty or Placeholder sections.

After the scoped sections are written, Phase 5 runs the AD-ART-BIBLE sign-off in full review mode only and records the verdict in the art bible's status header. Phase 6 closes with an AskUserQuestion of next steps filtered by project state.

---

Static Assertions (Structural)

Checked against the SKILL.md by /skill-test spec — no fixture needed.

• Has required frontmatter fields: name, description, argument-hint, user-invocable, allowed-tools
• Has ≥2 phase headings
• Contains gate verdict keywords recorded in the status header: APPROVED, CONCERNS
• Contains ask-before-write language: "May I create design/art/art-bible.md from the art bible template?" before the file exists, and a per-section approval option that names the write (Lock this in and write it to design/art/art-bible.md)
• Documents the AD-ART-BIBLE director gate and its mode behavior
• Has a next-step handoff (e.g., /map-systems, /create-architecture)

---

Director Gate Checks

Gate ID	Trigger condition	Mode guard
AD-ART-BIBLE	Phase 5 — after all sections in the Phase 1 scope are written	full only; lean notes "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Lean mode.", solo notes "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Solo mode."

The gate is spawned as the agent its definition names (.claude/docs/director-gates/ad-art-bible.md: art-director) and is passed the four items that definition lists: the art bible path, the game pillars and core fantasy, the platform and performance constraints (platform.* and performance.*), and the visual identity anchor. From a one-page brief it passes the brief's pitch and "what they feel" line as the pillars and fantasy, and its "Art & audio direction" line as the anchor.

The section-drafting delegation to art-director (and to ux-designer / technical-artist) is not a gate: it is mandatory and runs in every review mode.

---

Test Cases

Case 1: Happy Path — Full mode, full workflow, all nine sections, AD-ART-BIBLE approves

Fixture:

• No design/art/art-bible.md
• design/gdd/game-concept.md exists with pillars and a Visual Identity Anchor section
• project.yaml has modes.review_mode: full and modes.workflow: full
• AD-ART-BIBLE returns APPROVE

Input: /art-bible

Expected behavior:

1. Phase 0 reads the game concept and extracts title, pitch, pillars, the Visual Identity Anchor and platform
2. Phase 1 asks one AskUserQuestion with a Scope tab (Full bible marked Recommended, because full requires all 9 sections) and a free-text References tab, and notes the anchor it found
3. Section 1: art-director drafts it; the user picks from [A] Lock this in and write it to design/art/art-bible.md / [B] Revise the one-liner / [C] Revise a supporting principle / [D] Describe my own direction; after "May I create design/art/art-bible.md from the art bible template?", the file is created from .claude/docs/templates/art-bible.md and the approved section replaces Section 1's [To be designed] line
4. Sections 2–4: one art-director call returns three labelled blocks; Section 2 is presented, approved with the option that names the write, and written before Section 3 is presented, and so on
5. Sections 5–6: one art-director call; presented, approved and written one at a time
6. Section 7: art-director and ux-designer spawn in parallel; Section 8: art-director and technical-artist spawn in parallel; Section 9: art-director
7. Phase 5: AD-ART-BIBLE spawns after the ninth section is written, with the art bible path, the pillars and core fantasy, the platform and performance constraints, and the visual identity anchor
8. The status header records > **Art Director Sign-Off (AD-ART-BIBLE)**: APPROVED [date]
9. Phase 6: AskUserQuestion of next steps that always includes /create-architecture and "Stop here"

Assertions:

• The Scope tab marks "Full bible — all 9 sections" as Recommended and says why
• Every section's content comes from a spawned specialist, never from the orchestrator's own drafting
• Sections 2–4 come from a single art-director call but are presented, approved and written one section at a time
• No section is written before an approval whose option names the write (Lock this in and write it to design/art/art-bible.md), and each is written immediately after it
• The file is created from .claude/docs/templates/art-bible.md only after "May I create design/art/art-bible.md from the art bible template?" — an ask that names the file — so its nine ## N. Name headings are the ones retrofit mode (Case 4) reads
• AD-ART-BIBLE spawns only after all nine sections are written, as art-director (the agent its gate definition names)
• AD-ART-BIBLE is passed all four context items: the art bible path, the pillars and core fantasy, the platform and performance constraints, and the visual identity anchor
• The APPROVE verdict is recorded in the art bible's status header line
• The closing options include /create-architecture and "Stop here"

---

Case 2: AD-ART-BIBLE Returns CONCERNS or NOT ASSESSED

Fixture:

• All nine sections have been written to design/art/art-bible.md
• project.yaml has modes.review_mode: full and modes.workflow: full
• Scenario (a): AD-ART-BIBLE returns CONCERNS: "Color System does not match the Mood & Atmosphere targets for combat"
• Scenario (b): AD-ART-BIBLE returns NOT ASSESSED — no platform or performance constraints were available to check the asset standards against

Input: /art-bible (reaching Phase 5)

Expected behavior:

1. (a) The CONCERNS are surfaced to the user via AskUserQuestion with the standard options from director-gates.md: Revise flagged items / Accept and proceed / Discuss further
2. (a) If "Accept and proceed": the status header records CONCERNS (accepted) [date]
3. (a) If "Revise flagged items": art-director — the Color System's own specialist — re-drafts Section 4; it is shown to the user and approved with the option that names the write before it is written; the status header then records REVISED [date]
4. (b) The missing input is named, and the status header records NOT ASSESSED [date] — [missing input], never APPROVED
5. Phase 6 runs only after the verdict is recorded

Assertions:

• (a) CONCERNS are shown to the user with the three standard options, not auto-accepted
• (a) "Accept and proceed" records CONCERNS (accepted) [date] in the status header
• (a) The flagged section is re-drafted by its specialist, not by the orchestrator, and approved before it is written; the header records REVISED [date]
• (b) NOT ASSESSED is recorded as such, naming the missing input — not as an approval
• Phase 6 next steps are not presented before the verdict is recorded

---

Case 3: Lean Mode, Standard Workflow — Core sections only, gate skipped

Fixture:

• No existing art bible
• design/gdd/game-concept.md exists
• project.yaml has modes.review_mode: lean and modes.workflow: standard
• User picks the Recommended scope

Input: /art-bible

Expected behavior:

1. The Scope tab marks "Visual identity core (sections 1–4 only)" as Recommended and says "Sections 1–4 are what standard requires; 5–9 are available if you want them."
2. Sections 1–4 are drafted by art-director, each approved and written before the next
3. Phases 3 and 4 (sections 5–9) are not run, because they are outside the chosen scope
4. Phase 5 does not spawn AD-ART-BIBLE and prints "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Lean mode."
5. Phase 6 first names sections 5–9 as not authored this run (outside the chosen scope), then presents next steps

Assertions:

• The Scope recommendation is sections 1–4, with the standard explanation
• Only sections 1–4 are authored
• The close names sections 5–9 as not authored and says why, so the four-section bible does not read as complete
• AD-ART-BIBLE is not spawned in lean mode, and the skip note reads "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Lean mode."
• Per-section user approval is still required before each write

---

Case 4: Existing Art Bible — Retrofit of incomplete sections only

Fixture:

• design/art/art-bible.md exists with sections 1–4 fully written
• Section 5's heading is followed by [To be designed]
• Sections 6–9 have headings with nothing between them
• design/gdd/game-concept.md exists; project.yaml has modes.workflow: full and modes.review_mode: full
• At the Scope tab the user picks Resume — fill in missing sections
• AD-ART-BIBLE returns APPROVE

Input: /art-bible

Expected behavior:

1. Phase 0 Globs design/art/art-bible.md and finds it
2. The skill runs two Greps — ^## headings and placeholder markers ([To be designed], [TBD], [To be written], TODO) — and does not read the whole document; an ambiguous section is read by line range only
3. It builds a status table (sections 1–4 Complete, 5 Placeholder, 6–9 Empty) and says: "Found existing art bible at design/art/art-bible.md. 4 sections are complete, 5 need content. I'll work on the incomplete sections only — existing content will not be touched."
4. Only sections 5–9 are authored, approved and written; sections 1–4 are not re-authored or rewritten
5. After the ninth section is written, Phase 5 spawns AD-ART-BIBLE — a retrofit still ends in the sign-off in full review mode — and the status header records APPROVED [date]
6. Phase 6 names sections 1–4 as not authored this run (already complete)

Assertions:

• Section status comes from the two Greps, not from a full read of the file
• The retrofit message states the complete and incomplete counts and that existing content will not be touched
• Only Empty and Placeholder sections are authored; Complete sections are left unchanged
• The status table rows use the section names the skill authors (e.g., Mood & Atmosphere, Shape Language, Reference Direction)
• AD-ART-BIBLE runs after the retrofitted sections are written, as it does after a fresh run

---

Case 5: Solo Mode and Missing Concept

Fixture:

• Scenario (a): no design/gdd/game-concept.md; design/game-brief.md exists; project.yaml has modes.review_mode: solo and modes.workflow: minimal
• Scenario (b): neither design/gdd/game-concept.md nor design/game-brief.md exists

Input: /art-bible

Expected behavior:

1. (a) Phase 0 reads the one-page brief (working title, pitch, "what they feel" line, "Art & audio direction" line) in place of the concept
2. (a) Before the Scope question, the skill says no art bible is required at minimal and offers sections 1–4 rather than defaulting to all 9
3. (a) art-director is still spawned to draft each authored section — the solo review mode skips the sign-off, not the authoring delegation
4. (a) Phase 5 prints "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Solo mode." and no gate agent is spawned; on "May I record the skipped sign-off in design/art/art-bible.md's header?" answered yes, the status header records > **Art Director Sign-Off (AD-ART-BIBLE)**: SKIPPED [date] — solo mode
5. (a) Phase 6, at workflow: minimal, offers /create-stories, /dev-story [next story] and Stop here — not /create-architecture or the GDD//map-systems pool
6. (b) The skill stops with: "No game concept found. Run /brainstorm first — the art bible is authored after the game concept is approved." No file is created and no agent is spawned

Assertions:

• (a) The game brief is used when the game concept is absent
• (a) The skill states no art bible is required at minimal before asking the Scope question
• (a) art-director still drafts the sections in solo mode
• (a) AD-ART-BIBLE is not spawned; the skip note reads "AD-ART-BIBLE skipped — Solo mode.", and the header records the SKIPPED sign-off line with the mode and date
• (a) The Phase 6 option pool is the workflow: minimal set, not the standard/full GDD pool
• (b) The skill stops with the /brainstorm message and writes nothing

---

Protocol Compliance

• Reads the game concept (or game brief) before authoring; stops with the /brainstorm message if neither exists
• Every section is drafted by a specialist agent; the orchestrator never drafts content itself
• Each section is presented, approved and written one at a time — approvals and writes are never batched
• The file is created only after the "May I create design/art/art-bible.md…" ask, and each section is written only after an approval option that names the write
• Only the sections in the chosen scope are authored, and the close names every section left out and why
• Conflicts between art-director and ux-designer or technical-artist are surfaced to the user, never silently resolved
• AD-ART-BIBLE runs only in full mode, after the scoped sections are written; lean and solo print a skip note naming the gate and mode
• Ends with an AskUserQuestion of next steps filtered by project state — at standard/full always including /create-architecture and "Stop here"; at workflow: minimal, /create-stories or /dev-story [next story] plus Stop here

---

Coverage Notes

• An AD-ART-BIBLE REJECT verdict is not separately tested; per the standard verdict rules the skill surfaces the blockers and does not advance until they are resolved, the flagged sections re-drafted by their specialist and re-approved as in Case 2 (a).
• At workflow: standard the art bible is required only when visual asset stories exist. That condition is not fixture-tested; Case 3 covers only the standard scope recommendation.
• The Section 7 (art-director vs ux-designer) and Section 8 (art-director vs technical-artist) conflict handling is covered only by Protocol Compliance, not by a dedicated fixture.
• The "Asset standards only (section 8)" scope option is not fixture-tested (Case 4 covers "Resume").
• docs.density depth variations and guided / autonomous automation modes are not tested.
• The Phase 6 option filtering (skip /map-systems when design/gdd/systems-index.md exists, etc.) is not individually tested.