mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-10-16 01:37:05 +00:00
DonchitosandClaude Opus 5
d05699707f
`project.yaml` at the repo root is now the single source of truth for a project's configuration, replacing `production/stage.txt`, `production/review-mode.txt` and `.claude/docs/technical-preferences.md` (all three still read as a fallback; nothing is force-deleted). **`modes.rigor` — one question instead of six.** `minimal`, `standard` or `full` fronts six knobs: `modes.workflow`, `docs.density`, `qa.level`, `modes.story_granularity`, `modes.review_mode` and `team.size`. It defaults to `minimal`, which is a change from 1.0's behaviour: the heavier tier was measured costing several times more to reach working code without producing a better result, and returning nothing when a fresh developer inherited the project. Pin `modes.rigor: standard` to keep 1.0's process level. Also in this release: - `/settings` to view or change any setting, and `project.local.yaml` for per-developer preferences that should not be committed. - `system_overrides` to hold one system to a higher standard than the rest of the project, and `testing.strict` to set per test type whether missing evidence blocks a story or warns. - A story that changes anything the player sees is not closed until the game has been launched, observed, and a screenshot retained in `production/qa/evidence/`. A parse check is not a run. This holds at every rigor level, including `minimal`, where automated tests are waived but the look is not. - The code root is engine-specific and enforced as such: Godot `src/`, Unity `Assets/`, Unreal `Source/<Module>/`. Two of the three will not build a project laid out any other way. - Migration tooling for existing projects: `.claude/scripts/migrate-v1-config.sh` converts a 1.0 layout, non-destructively by default, with a report to review before `--finalize` deletes anything. - Ask-before-write holds regardless of personal automation settings. Upgrading from 1.0 or earlier: see UPGRADING.md. Full list of changes: CHANGELOG.md. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016xvzG3i7pWQg4LjyDwWMXd
28 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
28 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
> Gate definition. The spawning skill passes this file's path to the director agent; the AGENT reads it — the parent session should not.
|
|
|
|
# QL-STORY-READY — QA Lead Story Readiness Check
|
|
|
|
Agent: `qa-lead` | Model tier: Sonnet (Tier 2 lead — invoked when a domain specialist's feasibility sign-off is needed)
|
|
|
|
**Trigger**: Before a story is accepted into a sprint — invoked by `/create-stories`,
|
|
`/story-readiness`, and `/sprint-plan` during story selection
|
|
|
|
**Context to pass**:
|
|
- Story file path
|
|
- Story type (Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/Data)
|
|
- Acceptance criteria list (verbatim from the story)
|
|
- The GDD requirement (TR-ID and text) the story covers
|
|
|
|
**Prompt**:
|
|
> "Review this story's acceptance criteria for testability before it enters the
|
|
> sprint. Are all criteria specific enough that a developer would know unambiguously
|
|
> when they are done? For Logic-type stories: can every criterion be verified with
|
|
> an automated test? For Integration stories: is each criterion observable in a
|
|
> controlled test environment? Flag criteria that are too vague to implement
|
|
> against, and flag criteria that require a full game build to test (mark these
|
|
> DEFERRED, not BLOCKED). Return ADEQUATE (criteria are implementable as written),
|
|
> GAPS [specific criteria needing refinement], or INADEQUATE [criteria are too
|
|
> vague — story must be revised before sprint inclusion]."
|
|
|
|
**Verdicts**: ADEQUATE / GAPS / INADEQUATE
|