mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-10-16 01:37:05 +00:00
DonchitosandClaude Opus 5.5
be8993bbc5
Fix release for 1.1.2: the 14 longest skills keep their later phases after a compaction, a question nobody answered is never taken as an answer, settings read the same from a subfolder, the commit check works for a project in a subfolder of a larger repository, every skill opens with a title, and the shipped allow rules no longer approve deleting a branch or writing files without asking. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.2 → v1.1.3). Refs #83 Refs #133 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185en4t76fPn7315q4c3nko
133 lines
6.6 KiB
Markdown
133 lines
6.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: architecture-decision
|
|
description: "Create an ADR documenting a technical decision: context, alternatives considered, consequences."
|
|
argument-hint: "[title | retrofit <path> | accept <ADR-id>] [--review full|lean|solo]"
|
|
user-invocable: true
|
|
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Agent, AskUserQuestion, Bash(wc -c *), Bash(bash "*/.claude/skills/architecture-decision/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config *)
|
|
model: sonnet
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
!`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density,team.size`
|
|
|
|
Resolved above — use as-is; `--review` overrides `review_mode`. No block →
|
|
defaults in `.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`.
|
|
|
|
# Architecture Decision
|
|
|
|
When this skill is invoked:
|
|
|
|
## 0. Parse Arguments — Detect Retrofit / Acceptance Mode
|
|
|
|
See `.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in `.claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md` — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
|
|
|
|
Every `AskUserQuestion` call follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md`
|
|
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
|
|
`automation_always_ask` categories always prompt).
|
|
|
|
**`team.size`**: which agents validate this ADR (orthogonal to review_mode/workflow).
|
|
- **`individual`** (default): `technical-director` (TD-ADR) + the engine-specialist.
|
|
- **`small`** and **`studio`**: the same two. This skill spawns no engine
|
|
sub-specialist and no adversarial reviewer at any size.
|
|
|
|
**`docs.density`** — it controls the *depth* of the ADR's prose sections, not
|
|
which sections the skeleton emits (that is fixed). `modes.rigor` sets it
|
|
alongside `workflow`; set `docs.density` explicitly to vary ADR verbosity alone:
|
|
`terse` (the default, via `rigor: minimal`) = decision + alternatives as bullets, one line of rationale each;
|
|
`balanced` = paragraph per section with light rationale (`rigor: standard`); `thorough` =
|
|
full prose with trade-offs and worked rationale in Decision, Alternatives, and
|
|
Consequences. Apply it to the prose sections; the Engine Compatibility, ADR
|
|
Dependencies, and GDD Requirements tables are structural and stay whole at every
|
|
density.
|
|
|
|
**`workflow`** (see `.claude/docs/workflow-modes.md`):
|
|
- `full` — all ADRs on the required ADR list must be completed.
|
|
- `standard` — critical ADRs only (Foundation-layer systems).
|
|
- `minimal` — not required. Can still be run voluntarily.
|
|
|
|
**If the argument starts with `retrofit` followed by a file path**
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/0-retrofit.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
**If the argument starts with `accept` followed by an ADR id**
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/0-accept.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
If NOT in retrofit or acceptance mode, proceed to Step 1 below (normal ADR authoring).
|
|
|
|
**No-argument guard**: If no argument was provided (title is empty), ask before
|
|
running Phase 0:
|
|
|
|
> "What technical decision are you documenting? Please provide a short title
|
|
> (e.g., `event-system-architecture`, `physics-engine-choice`)."
|
|
|
|
Use the user's response as the title, then proceed to Step 1.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 1. Load Engine Context (ALWAYS FIRST)
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/1-engine-context.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
## 2. Determine the next ADR number
|
|
|
|
Scan `docs/architecture/` for existing ADRs to find the next number.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 3. Gather context
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/3-gather-context.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
## 4. Guide the decision collaboratively
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/4-decide.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
## 5. Generate the ADR
|
|
|
|
**Read `references/5-generate.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
|
|
|
|
## 6. Closing Next Steps
|
|
|
|
After the ADR is written (and registry optionally updated), close with `AskUserQuestion`.
|
|
|
|
Before generating the widget:
|
|
1. Read `docs/registry/architecture.yaml` — check if any priority ADRs are still unwritten (look for ADRs flagged in technical-preferences.md or systems-index.md as prerequisites)
|
|
2. Check if all prerequisite ADRs are now written. If yes, include a "Start writing GDDs" option.
|
|
3. List ALL remaining priority ADRs as individual options — not just the next one or two.
|
|
|
|
Widget format:
|
|
```
|
|
ADR-[NNNN] written and registry updated. What would you like to do next?
|
|
[1] Write [next-priority-adr-name] — [brief description from prerequisites list]
|
|
[2] Write [another-priority-adr] — [brief description] (include ALL remaining ones)
|
|
[N] Start writing GDDs — run `/design-system [first-undesigned-system]` (only show if all prerequisite ADRs are written)
|
|
[N+1] Stop here for this session
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If there are no remaining priority ADRs and no undesigned GDD systems, offer only "Stop here" and suggest running `/architecture-review` in a fresh session.
|
|
|
|
**Always include this fixed notice in the closing output (do NOT omit it):**
|
|
|
|
> To validate ADR coverage against your GDDs, open a **fresh Claude Code session**
|
|
> and run `/architecture-review`.
|
|
>
|
|
> **Never run `/architecture-review` in the same session as `/architecture-decision`.**
|
|
> The reviewing agent must be independent of the authoring context to give an unbiased
|
|
> assessment. Running it here would invalidate the review.
|
|
|
|
**Do NOT unblock stories here.** This ADR is `Proposed` — Step 5 guarantees it,
|
|
and a story blocked *pending this decision* is still pending it. Unblocking on
|
|
authoring is how the deadlock stayed invisible: it defeated the guard at the
|
|
moment the guard became relevant, so the pipeline appeared to flow while running
|
|
on decisions nobody had accepted.
|
|
|
|
Instead, tell the user what is now waiting on acceptance:
|
|
|
|
> "ADR-NNNN is written and `Proposed`. [N] stories remain `Blocked` pending it.
|
|
> Run `/architecture-decision accept ADR-NNNN` when the decision is settled —
|
|
> that is what moves them to `Ready`."
|
|
|
|
List the blocked stories by path so the cost of leaving it Proposed is visible.
|
|
(Acceptance has consequences enforced across many skills and an authority
|
|
recorded in only a few, so the route between them must stay explicit.)
|