添加 claude code game studios 到项目

CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/authoring/create-architecture.md

@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
+# Skill Test Spec: /create-architecture
+
+## Skill Summary
+
+`/create-architecture` guides the user through section-by-section authoring of a
+technical architecture document. It uses a skeleton-first approach — the file is
+created with all required section headers before any content is filled. Each
+section is discussed, drafted, and written individually after user approval. If an
+architecture document already exists, the skill offers retrofit mode to update
+specific sections.
+
+In `full` review mode, TD-ARCHITECTURE (technical-director) and LP-FEASIBILITY
+(lead-programmer) spawn after the complete draft is finished. In `lean` or `solo`
+mode, both gates are skipped. The skill writes to `docs/architecture/architecture.md`.
+
+---
+
+## Static Assertions (Structural)
+
+Verified automatically by `/skill-test static` — no fixture needed.
+
+- [ ] Has required frontmatter fields: `name`, `description`, `argument-hint`, `user-invocable`, `allowed-tools`
+- [ ] Has ≥2 phase headings
+- [ ] Contains verdict keywords: APPROVED, NEEDS REVISION, MAJOR REVISION NEEDED
+- [ ] Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language (per-section approval)
+- [ ] Has a next-step handoff at the end (`/architecture-review` or `/create-control-manifest`)
+- [ ] Documents skeleton-first approach
+- [ ] Documents gate behavior: TD-ARCHITECTURE + LP-FEASIBILITY in full mode; skipped in lean/solo
+- [ ] Documents retrofit mode for existing architecture documents
+
+---
+
+## Director Gate Checks
+
+In `full` mode: TD-ARCHITECTURE (technical-director) and LP-FEASIBILITY
+(lead-programmer) spawn in parallel after all sections are drafted and before
+any final approval write.
+
+In `lean` mode: both gates are skipped. Output notes:
+"TD-ARCHITECTURE skipped — lean mode" and "LP-FEASIBILITY skipped — lean mode".
+
+In `solo` mode: both gates are skipped with equivalent notes.
+
+---
+
+## Test Cases
+
+### Case 1: Happy Path — New architecture doc, skeleton-first, full mode gates approve
+
+**Fixture:**
+- No existing `docs/architecture/architecture.md`
+- `docs/architecture/` contains Accepted ADRs for reference
+- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
+
+**Input:** `/create-architecture`
+
+**Expected behavior:**
+1. Skill creates skeleton `docs/architecture/architecture.md` with all required section headers
+2. For each section: drafts content, shows draft, asks "May I write [section]?", writes after approval
+3. After all sections are drafted: TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY spawn in parallel
+4. Both gates return APPROVED
+5. Final "May I confirm architecture is complete?" asked
+6. Session state updated
+
+**Assertions:**
+- [ ] Skeleton file is created with all section headers before any content is written
+- [ ] "May I write [section]?" asked per section during authoring
+- [ ] TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY spawn in parallel (not sequentially)
+- [ ] Both gates complete before the final completion confirmation
+- [ ] Verdict is APPROVED when both gates return APPROVED
+- [ ] Next-step handoff to `/architecture-review` or `/create-control-manifest` is present
+
+---
+
+### Case 2: Failure Path — TD-ARCHITECTURE returns MAJOR REVISION
+
+**Fixture:**
+- Architecture doc is fully drafted (all sections)
+- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
+- TD-ARCHITECTURE gate returns MAJOR REVISION: "[specific structural issue]"
+
+**Input:** `/create-architecture`
+
+**Expected behavior:**
+1. All sections are drafted and written
+2. TD-ARCHITECTURE gate runs and returns MAJOR REVISION with specific feedback
+3. Skill surfaces the feedback to the user
+4. Architecture is NOT marked as finalized
+5. User is asked: revise the flagged sections, or accept the document as a draft
+
+**Assertions:**
+- [ ] Architecture is NOT marked finalized when TD-ARCHITECTURE returns MAJOR REVISION
+- [ ] Gate feedback is shown to the user with specific issue descriptions
+- [ ] User is given the option to revise specific sections
+- [ ] Skill does NOT auto-finalize despite MAJOR REVISION feedback
+
+---
+
+### Case 3: Lean Mode — Both gates skipped; architecture written with user approval only
+
+**Fixture:**
+- No existing architecture doc
+- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `lean`
+
+**Input:** `/create-architecture`
+
+**Expected behavior:**
+1. Skeleton file is created
+2. All sections are authored and written per-section with user approval
+3. After completion: TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY are skipped
+4. Output notes: "TD-ARCHITECTURE skipped — lean mode" and "LP-FEASIBILITY skipped — lean mode"
+5. Architecture is considered complete based on user approval alone
+
+**Assertions:**
+- [ ] Both gate skip notes appear in output
+- [ ] Architecture document is written with only user approval in lean mode
+- [ ] Skill does NOT block completion because gates were skipped
+- [ ] Next-step handoff is still present
+
+---
+
+### Case 4: Retrofit Mode — Existing architecture doc, user updates a section
+
+**Fixture:**
+- `docs/architecture/architecture.md` already exists with all sections populated
+
+**Input:** `/create-architecture`
+
+**Expected behavior:**
+1. Skill detects existing architecture doc and reads its current content
+2. Skill offers retrofit mode: "Architecture doc already exists. Which section would you like to update?"
+3. User selects a section
+4. Skill authors only that section, asks "May I write [section]?"
+5. Only the selected section is updated — other sections unchanged
+
+**Assertions:**
+- [ ] Skill detects and reads the existing architecture doc before offering retrofit
+- [ ] User is asked which section to update — not asked to rewrite the whole document
+- [ ] Only the selected section is updated
+- [ ] Other sections are not modified during a retrofit session
+
+---
+
+### Case 5: Director Gate — Architecture references a Proposed ADR; flagged as risk
+
+**Fixture:**
+- Architecture doc is being authored
+- One section references or depends on an ADR that has `Status: Proposed`
+- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
+
+**Input:** `/create-architecture`
+
+**Expected behavior:**
+1. Skill authors all sections
+2. During authoring, skill detects a reference to a Proposed ADR
+3. Skill flags: "Note: [section] references ADR-NNN which is Proposed — this is a risk until the ADR is accepted"
+4. Risk flag is embedded in the relevant section's content
+5. TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY still run — they are informed of the Proposed ADR risk
+
+**Assertions:**
+- [ ] Proposed ADR reference is detected and flagged during section authoring
+- [ ] Risk note is embedded in the architecture document section
+- [ ] TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY still spawn (the risk does not block the gates)
+- [ ] Risk flag names the specific ADR number and title
+
+---
+
+## Protocol Compliance
+
+- [ ] Skeleton file created with all section headers before any content is written
+- [ ] "May I write [section]?" asked per section during authoring
+- [ ] TD-ARCHITECTURE and LP-FEASIBILITY spawn in parallel in full mode
+- [ ] Skipped gates noted by name and mode in lean/solo output
+- [ ] Proposed ADR references flagged as risks in the document
+- [ ] Ends with next-step handoff: `/architecture-review` or `/create-control-manifest`
+
+---
+
+## Coverage Notes
+
+- The required section list for architecture documents is defined in the skill
+  body and in the `/architecture-review` skill — not re-enumerated here.
+- Engine version stamping in the architecture doc (parallel to ADR stamping)
+  is part of the authoring workflow — tested implicitly via Case 1.
+- The retrofit mode for updating multiple sections in one session follows the
+  same per-section approval pattern — not independently tested for multi-section
+  retrofits.