Files
Claude-Code-Game-Studios/.claude/docs/settings-guidance.md
T
DonchitosandClaude Opus 5.5 b21fa0f7f2 Release 1.1.2 — the default path works end to end
Fix release for 1.1.1: the minimal path end to end, engine commands that
run on Godot, Unity and Unreal, hook warnings you can see, and verdicts
that say when they could not check. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade
steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.1 → v1.1.2).

Fixes #67
Fixes #131

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuJn2FdynEybfL5KC697nJ
2026-09-29 21:32:19 +10:00

6.5 KiB

Settings Guidance — which value to recommend, and when

The advisory layer for project settings. This doc answers two questions no other doc does:

  1. Which value should a skill recommend for a given project or user?
  2. When should a skill proactively suggest changing a setting already set?

Boundary with its siblings — do not duplicate their content here

Doc Answers Nature
effects-map.md What each setting does Descriptive
config-resolution.md How a setting resolves (precedence chain) Mechanical
settings-guidance.md (this file) Which value to recommend, and when Prescriptive

Skills reference this doc on demand, only at a "recommend a setting" moment. It is deliberately not a CLAUDE.md import — advisory content must not ride in per-turn context (the same reason context-management.md was demoted).


1. The knob that matters most: modes.rigor

Almost every "what settings should I use?" question reduces to one choice: modes.rigor (minimal | standard | full, default minimal). It fronts six sub-knobs — modes.workflow, docs.density, qa.level, modes.story_granularity, modes.review_mode, team.size. Recommend rigor, not the six; let the expansion do the rest. Full expansion table lives in effects-map.md § modes.rigor — do not restate it here.

modes.automation (collaborative | guided | autonomous) is a separate axis — how often skills stop to confirm — and is not fronted by rigor. Pick it by working style, not by game type (see § 5).


2. Archetype → rigor presets

Match the project to an archetype; recommend the paired rigor. These are starting points, not verdicts — the user can always override.

Archetype Rigor Why Common override
Weekend jam / prototype / throwaway minimal Shipping beats recording; design lives in the maker's head Bump one deep system: workflow_overrides.system_overrides: {combat: full}
Small solo / hobby game (arcade, puzzle, short narrative) minimal → standard if it grows Start light; add rigor when scope proves real —
Focused commercial indie (platformer, roguelike, tactics, deckbuilder) standard One well-understood loop; enough design to build correctly "Comprehensive but compact": rigor: full + docs.density: terse
Systems-heavy / long-haul (open-world RPG, colony sim, immersive sim, 4X, survival) full Many interacting systems; a design mistake costs weeks Solo dev: keep full on disk, set review_mode: solo locally
Live-service / competitive multiplayer full + domain emphasis Full pipeline plus netcode/security/live-ops Raise qa.level / testing.strict.* for the online-critical types

The model: the table picks a baseline; overrides handle the diagonal. Most real projects are one baseline plus one or two deliberate exceptions.


3. Seeding rigor from a described concept

When the user has described their game (e.g. /start Phase 2 free text), map it to an archetype and pre-select the recommendation rather than asking cold. Signals:

Concept mentions… Lean toward
open-world, RPG, sim, sandbox, faction, crafting, economy, MMO, multiplayer, "systems" full
jam, weekend, prototype, "first game", small, "just trying", experiment minimal
"release", "commercial", "on Steam", a single clear core loop standard
ambiguous / nothing above minimal (the documented default)

Rules: these are heuristics, never locks. Always confirm the pre-selection with the user in their own terms ("Sounds like a big systems game — I'd suggest full rigor; want that?"). If the user has no concept yet (exploring), do not seed full — default minimal, and revisit once a concept exists.

"No concept yet" means no signal, not a particular onboarding path. A rough one-line hint is still a description: if it trips the signals above, seed from the signal. Only fall back to minimal-for-exploring when the user has given you nothing to map. (/start Phase 3d states the same rule for its Path A/B branch — the two must agree, since both drive the identical recommendation.)


4. When to recommend a change (adaptive triggers)

Bidirectional and threshold-based. Fire only on a threshold crossing, never every session — that is what keeps this from becoming the nagging the automation modes exist to eliminate.

Trigger (crossing) Direction Detectable signal Suggested action
Project grew past its band ↑ raise System-GDD count crosses ~9, or the code root (src/, Assets/ or Source/) crosses the Production threshold, while rigor is minimal "You're at N systems on rigor: minimal — most projects this size run standard. Revisit? → /settings"
Stage advanced into Production ↑ raise /gate-check PASS into Production while rigor is minimal Same, offered once at the gate
User sounds overwhelmed by process ↓ lower Phrases like "too many steps", "so much documentation", "overwhelmed" — and rigor is not already minimal "If the required-doc list feels heavy, a lower rigor trims it → /settings modes.rigor=standard"
Chosen rigor mismatches described scope flag once Onboarding pick contradicts the Phase-2 description State it in one sentence, offer /settings, do not re-ask

Frequency guard: the crossing is the gate. Because the hosts (/gate-check on PASS, /help on request) are themselves infrequent, no persistent "already nudged" state is needed — but never emit the same suggestion twice in one session.


5. Which skills reference this doc, and when

Skill Moment Sections used
/start Phase 3d/4 — choosing rigor § 2 (presets), § 3 (seed from concept)
/help escalation footer when user sounds stuck/overwhelmed § 4 (lower trigger)
/gate-check on PASS into a new stage § 4 (raise trigger)
/settings view output — further reading § 2 (choosing a value)

Each skill carries a one-line pointer to this doc, not a copy of its tables.


6. How to phrase a recommendation

  • Recommend, don't dictate. State the suggestion and the reason in one line; the user decides. (collaborative/guided require this; even autonomous treats a rigor change as a schema_changes decision and asks.)
  • Always route to /settings — never edit project.yaml as a side effect of a recommendation.
  • One line, then stop. A nudge is a nudge, not a lecture.