添加 claude code game studios 到项目
This commit is contained in:
panw
189
CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/utility/brainstorm.md
Normal file
189
CCGS Skill Testing Framework/skills/utility/brainstorm.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
|
||||
# Skill Test Spec: /brainstorm
|
||||
|
||||
## Skill Summary
|
||||
|
||||
`/brainstorm` facilitates guided game concept ideation. It presents 2-4 concept
|
||||
options with pros/cons, lets the user choose and refine a concept, and produces
|
||||
a structured `design/gdd/game-concept.md` document. The skill is collaborative —
|
||||
it asks questions before proposing options and iterates until the user approves
|
||||
a concept direction.
|
||||
|
||||
In `full` review mode, four director gates spawn in parallel after the concept
|
||||
is drafted: CD-PILLARS (creative-director), AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL (art-director),
|
||||
TD-FEASIBILITY (technical-director), and PR-SCOPE (producer). In `lean` mode,
|
||||
all 4 inline gates are skipped (lean mode only runs PHASE-GATEs, and brainstorm
|
||||
has none). In `solo` mode, all gates are skipped. The skill asks "May I write"
|
||||
before writing `design/gdd/game-concept.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, REJECTED, CONCERNS
|
||||
- [ ] Contains "May I write" collaborative protocol language (for game-concept.md)
|
||||
- [ ] Has a next-step handoff at the end (`/map-systems`)
|
||||
- [ ] Documents 4 director gates in full mode: CD-PILLARS, AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL, TD-FEASIBILITY, PR-SCOPE
|
||||
- [ ] Documents that all 4 gates are skipped in lean and solo modes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Director Gate Checks
|
||||
|
||||
In `full` mode: CD-PILLARS, AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL, TD-FEASIBILITY, and PR-SCOPE
|
||||
spawn in parallel after the concept draft is approved by the user.
|
||||
|
||||
In `lean` mode: all 4 inline gates are skipped (brainstorm has no PHASE-GATEs,
|
||||
so lean mode skips everything). Output notes all 4 as: "[GATE-ID] skipped — lean mode".
|
||||
|
||||
In `solo` mode: all 4 gates are skipped. Output notes all 4 as: "[GATE-ID] skipped — solo mode".
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Test Cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 1: Happy Path — Full mode, 3 concepts, user picks one, all 4 directors approve
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- No existing `design/gdd/game-concept.md`
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/brainstorm`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Skill asks the user questions about genre, scope, and target feeling
|
||||
2. Skill presents 3 concept options with pros/cons each
|
||||
3. User selects one concept
|
||||
4. Skill elaborates the chosen concept into a structured draft
|
||||
5. All 4 director gates spawn in parallel: CD-PILLARS, AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL, TD-FEASIBILITY, PR-SCOPE
|
||||
6. All 4 return APPROVED
|
||||
7. Skill asks "May I write `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?"
|
||||
8. Concept written after approval
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Exactly 3 concept options are presented (not 1, not 5+)
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 director gates spawn in parallel (not sequentially)
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 gates complete before the "May I write" ask
|
||||
- [ ] "May I write `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?" is asked before writing
|
||||
- [ ] Concept file is NOT written without user approval
|
||||
- [ ] Next-step handoff to `/map-systems` is present
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 2: Failure Path — CD-PILLARS returns REJECT
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Concept draft is complete
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
|
||||
- CD-PILLARS gate returns REJECT: "The concept has no identifiable creative pillar"
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/brainstorm`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. CD-PILLARS gate returns REJECT with specific feedback
|
||||
2. Skill surfaces the rejection to the user
|
||||
3. Concept is NOT written to file
|
||||
4. User is asked: rethink the concept direction, or override the rejection
|
||||
5. If rethinking: skill returns to the concept options phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] Concept is NOT written when CD-PILLARS returns REJECT
|
||||
- [ ] Rejection feedback is shown to the user verbatim
|
||||
- [ ] User is given the option to rethink or override
|
||||
- [ ] Skill returns to concept ideation phase if user chooses to rethink
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 3: Lean Mode — All 4 gates skipped; concept written after user confirms
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- No existing game concept
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `lean`
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/brainstorm`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Concept options are presented and user selects one
|
||||
2. Concept is elaborated into a structured draft
|
||||
3. All 4 director gates are skipped — each noted: "[GATE-ID] skipped — lean mode"
|
||||
4. Skill asks user to confirm the concept is ready to write
|
||||
5. "May I write `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?" asked after confirmation
|
||||
6. Concept written after approval
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 gate skip notes appear: "CD-PILLARS skipped — lean mode", "AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL skipped — lean mode", "TD-FEASIBILITY skipped — lean mode", "PR-SCOPE skipped — lean mode"
|
||||
- [ ] Concept is written after user confirmation only (no director approval needed in lean)
|
||||
- [ ] "May I write" is still asked before writing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 4: Solo Mode — All gates skipped; concept written with only user approval
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- No existing game concept
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `solo`
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/brainstorm`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. Concept options are presented and user selects one
|
||||
2. Concept draft is shown to user
|
||||
3. All 4 director gates are skipped — each noted with "solo mode"
|
||||
4. "May I write `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?" asked
|
||||
5. Concept written after user approval
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 skip notes appear with "solo mode" label
|
||||
- [ ] No director agents are spawned
|
||||
- [ ] Concept is written with only user approval
|
||||
- [ ] Behavior is otherwise equivalent to lean mode for this skill
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Case 5: Director Gate — PR-SCOPE returns CONCERNS (scope too large)
|
||||
|
||||
**Fixture:**
|
||||
- Concept draft is complete
|
||||
- `production/session-state/review-mode.txt` contains `full`
|
||||
- PR-SCOPE gate returns CONCERNS: "The concept scope would require 18+ months for a solo developer"
|
||||
|
||||
**Input:** `/brainstorm`
|
||||
|
||||
**Expected behavior:**
|
||||
1. PR-SCOPE gate returns CONCERNS with specific scope feedback
|
||||
2. Skill surfaces the scope concerns to the user
|
||||
3. Scope concerns are documented in the concept draft before writing
|
||||
4. User is asked: reduce scope, accept concerns and document them, or rethink
|
||||
5. If concerns are accepted: concept is written with a "Scope Risk" note embedded
|
||||
|
||||
**Assertions:**
|
||||
- [ ] PR-SCOPE concerns are shown to the user before the "May I write" ask
|
||||
- [ ] Skill does NOT write concept without surfacing scope concerns
|
||||
- [ ] If user accepts: scope concerns are documented in the concept file
|
||||
- [ ] Skill does NOT auto-reject a concept due to PR-SCOPE CONCERNS (user decides)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Protocol Compliance
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Presents 2-4 concept options with pros/cons before user commits
|
||||
- [ ] User confirms concept direction before director gates are invoked
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 director gates spawn in parallel in full mode
|
||||
- [ ] All 4 gates skipped in lean AND solo mode — each noted by name
|
||||
- [ ] "May I write `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?" asked before writing
|
||||
- [ ] Ends with next-step handoff: `/map-systems`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Coverage Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL gate (art director feasibility) is grouped with the other
|
||||
3 gates in the parallel spawn — not independently fixture-tested.
|
||||
- The iterative concept refinement loop (user rejects all options, skill
|
||||
generates new ones) is not fixture-tested — it follows the same pattern as
|
||||
the option selection phase.
|
||||
- The game-concept.md document structure (required sections) is defined in the
|
||||
skill body and not re-enumerated in test assertions.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user