design-review

Featured

Reviews a game design document for completeness, internal consistency, implementability, and adherence to project design standards. Run this before handing a design document to programmers.

Code & Development 66 stars 7 forks Updated 4 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 91/100

Stars 20%
61
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

## Phase 0: Parse Arguments Extract `--depth [full|lean|solo]` if present. Default is `full` when no flag is given. **Note**: `--depth` controls the *analysis depth* of this skill (how many specialist agents are spawned). It is independent of the global review mode in `production/review-mode.txt`, which controls director gate spawning. These are two different concepts — `--depth` is about how thoroughly *this* skill analyses the document. - **`full`**: Complete review — all phases + specialist agent delegation (Phase 3b) - **`lean`**: All phases, no specialist agents — faster, single-session analysis - **`solo`**: Phases 1-4 only, no delegation, no Phase 5 next-step prompt — use when called from within another skill --- ## Phase 1: Load Documents Read the target design document in full. Read AGENTS.md to understand project context and standards. Read related design documents referenced or implied by the target doc (check `design/gdd/` for related systems). **Dependency graph validation:** For every system listed in the Dependencies section, use Glob to check whether its GDD file exists in `design/gdd/`. Flag any that don't exist yet — these are broken references that downstream authors will hit. **Lore/narrative alignment:** If `design/gdd/game-concept.md` or any file in `design/narrative/` exists, read it. Note any mechanical choices in this GDD that contradict established world rules, tone, or design pillars. Pass this context to `game-designer` in Phase 3b. **Prio...

Details

Author
striderZA
Repository
striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios
Created
2 months ago
Last Updated
4 days ago
Language
JavaScript
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

Code & Development Featured

review-all-gdds

Holistic cross-GDD consistency and game design review. Reads all system GDDs simultaneously and checks for contradictions between them, stale references, ownership conflicts, formula incompatibilities, and game design theory violations (dominant strategies, economic imbalance, cognitive overload, pillar drift). Run after all MVP GDDs are written, before architecture begins.

66 Updated 4 days ago
striderZA
Web & Frontend Solid

review-design

Review a design doc against the actual codebase, find inconsistencies, and quiz the user on needed fixes. Loops until all issues are resolved. Use after /design-feature and before /implement-feature.

149 Updated yesterday
janekbaraniewski
AI & Automation Solid

unikit-gd-review

Qualitative quality review of game design documents — answers "is this design good, and does it follow best practices?" — across all three GDD axes: systems, flows, and content types. Fans out adversarial lenses (completeness, clarity, pillar alignment, systems-math, fantasy-delivery, feasibility, scope) plus domain lenses that check it against the game-design rules, each prompted to find problems rather than validate; produces a severity-graded verdict and a two-bucket report (apply-ready fixes vs research), handed to /unikit-gd-apply or /unikit-gd-explore in one move. Scope is inferred: a named system, flow, or content type reviews that document; "all" runs a cross-document review. Use when the user wants a critique, quality judgment, or rules check of the design, e.g. "review the combat GDD", "review the onboarding flow". This is the subjective quality pass — for a mechanical consistency check (numbers, terms, IDs, references matching the registry) use /unikit-gd-verify.

16 Updated 5 days ago
NintendaDev