Claude-Code-Game-Studios/CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/utility/soak-test.md

Skill Test Spec: /soak-test

Skill Summary

/soak-test [duration] [focus] generates an observation protocol for an extended play session — the human plays, the skill writes the plan. Duration is 30m, 1h, 2h or 4h (default 1h); focus is memory, stability, balance or all (default all). It reads engine.name and performance.* from project.yaml (falling back to technical-preferences.md), the game concept or brief, the latest playtest and QA plan, then builds timed checkpoints for the duration and engine-specific memory guidance whose alert thresholds are relative to the session's own T+0 baseline, in units recorded as displayed. The engine tool and counter names it gives are not covered by docs/engine-reference/, so they are marked NOT SOURCEABLE — pointers the tester confirms at T+0, recording the tool actually used.

The protocol document carries a Verdict section with PASS / PASS WITH CONCERNS / NOT ASSESSED / FAIL for the tester to fill in after the session; a short soak cannot return PASS. The skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to production/qa/soak-test-[date]-[duration].md?" before writing, and never runs the soak itself. No director gates apply.

---

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 verdict keywords: PASS, PASS WITH CONCERNS, NOT ASSESSED, FAIL
• Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language before writing the protocol
• Has a next-step handoff (/bug-triage sprint after the session; /smoke-check after fixing a FAIL)

---

Director Gate Checks

None. /soak-test is a QA planning utility. No director gates apply.

---

Test Cases

Case 1: Happy Path — 2-hour, all-focus soak on Godot

Fixture:

• project.yaml has engine.name: Godot and performance.target_framerate: 60
• design/gdd/game-concept.md states the intended session length
• The user approves the write

Input: /soak-test 2h all

Expected behavior:

1. Skill loads context: engine, performance budgets, concept, latest playtest and QA plan
2. Checkpoints for 2h: T+0, T+20, T+40, T+60, T+80, T+100, T+120
3. Godot memory items: the Debugger's memory monitors, Static Memory (unit as displayed), Object Count, Orphan Nodes — names marked NOT SOURCEABLE, since docs/engine-reference/godot/ does not cover them, for the tester to confirm at T+0; alert when memory grows > 20% from T+0 after the first 15 minutes; Orphan Nodes must return to its T+0 value after a scene unload
4. Stability items (60 fps target) and balance/fatigue items are both included
5. Protocol document has Pre-Session Setup, Baseline (T+0), a Checkpoint Log per checkpoint, Post-Session Analysis, and a Verdict section left for the tester
6. Skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to production/qa/soak-test-[date]-2h.md?"
7. After writing, prints the run steps ending with /bug-triage sprint

Assertions:

• Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+20, T+40, T+60, T+80, T+100, T+120
• Memory thresholds are relative to T+0, and the unit is recorded as displayed (no unit assumed)
• The Godot tool and counter names are marked NOT SOURCEABLE, not presented as verified, and Pre-Session Setup asks for the tool actually used
• Memory, stability and balance observation items are all present (focus all)
• "May I write" is asked with production/qa/soak-test-[date]-2h.md
• The skill issues no verdict itself — the protocol's Verdict section is left for the tester

---

Case 2: No Arguments — Defaults applied

Fixture:

• No arguments provided; engine configured

Input: /soak-test

Expected behavior:

1. Duration defaults to 1h, focus to all — no questions are needed to start
2. Checkpoints: T+0, T+15, T+30, T+45, T+60
3. Protocol header records Duration: 1h and Focus: all
4. Skill asks "May I write this soak test protocol to production/qa/soak-test-[date]-1h.md?"

Assertions:

• Duration 1h and focus all are used when no argument is given
• Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+15, T+30, T+45, T+60
• The output path ends -1h.md
• Nothing is written before the "May I write" approval

---

Case 3: Narrow Focus on Unreal — 4-hour memory soak

Fixture:

• project.yaml has engine.name: Unreal

Input: /soak-test 4h memory

Expected behavior:

1. Checkpoints for 4h: T+0, T+30, T+60, T+90, T+120, T+180, T+240
2. Unreal memory items: a memory readout at each checkpoint — stat memory, marked NOT SOURCEABLE since docs/engine-reference/unreal/ does not cover it; record Physical Memory Used and Available (units as displayed)
3. Alert threshold: Physical Memory Used growth > 20% over the full soak, against this run's T+0 — no absolute MB threshold
4. Balance/fatigue observation items are not generated (focus is memory)
5. Output path production/qa/soak-test-[date]-4h.md

Assertions:

• Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+30, T+60, T+90, T+120, T+180, T+240
• The Unreal threshold is a relative > 20% growth, not an absolute size
• stat memory is marked NOT SOURCEABLE, a pointer to confirm rather than a verified command
• Balance/fatigue items are omitted for focus memory
• "May I write" names the -4h.md path

---

Case 4: No Performance Budgets — "not set", never invented

Fixture:

• project.yaml has engine.name: Unity and no performance block
• technical-preferences.md Performance Budgets are [TO BE CONFIGURED]

Input: /soak-test 30m memory

Expected behavior:

1. Skill falls back from project.yaml to technical-preferences.md for budgets
2. Budget notes read Memory ceiling: not set, Target FPS: not set, Frame budget: not set — no number is supplied in their place
3. Checkpoints: T+0, T+10, T+20, T+30
4. Unity memory items: a memory profiler, marked NOT SOURCEABLE (not covered by docs/engine-reference/unity/); record Total Reserved Memory, GC Allocated, Object Count (units as displayed); alert when GC Allocated grows monotonically across 3+ checkpoints
5. Skill asks "May I write" before writing production/qa/soak-test-[date]-30m.md

Assertions:

• Missing budgets are recorded as "not set", not filled with defaults
• Checkpoints are exactly T+0, T+10, T+20, T+30
• The Unity threshold is the unit-free monotonic-growth check
• "May I write" is asked before the file is written

---

Case 5: Director Gate Check — No gate; soak-test is a planning utility

Fixture:

• Engine configured; valid duration and focus provided

Input: /soak-test 1h stability

Expected behavior:

1. Skill generates and writes the soak test protocol
2. No director agents are spawned
3. No gate IDs appear in output

Assertions:

• No director gate is invoked
• No gate skip messages appear
• The run ends at "Protocol written." with the run steps — no gate verdict, and no soak verdict issued by the skill

---

Protocol Compliance

• Parses [duration] [focus], defaulting to 1h and all
• Uses the Phase 3 checkpoint table for the chosen duration
• Memory alert thresholds are ratios or deltas against T+0; units are recorded as displayed
• Engine tool names not covered by docs/engine-reference/ are marked NOT SOURCEABLE; a memory tool the tester cannot find leaves the verdict NOT ASSESSED
• The protocol's Verdict section offers PASS / PASS WITH CONCERNS / NOT ASSESSED / FAIL and states a short soak cannot return PASS
• Asks "May I write" before creating production/qa/soak-test-[date]-[duration].md
• Never attempts to run the soak itself

---

Coverage Notes

• The stability and balance focus values follow Case 3's pattern with the other observation groups; not separately tested.
• At rigor: minimal the skill reads design/game-brief.md instead of the game concept; not separately tested.
• Executing the protocol is outside this skill's scope — it generates the plan, a human runs it.