adopt
Brownfield audit — do existing artifacts actually work? Numbered migration plan. Unlike /project-stage-detect, checks compliance…
Create an ADR documenting a technical decision: context, alternatives considered, consequences.
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill architecture-decision -a windsurf -y
name: architecture-decision description: "Create an ADR documenting a technical decision: context, alternatives considered, consequences." argument-hint: "[title | retrofit <path> | accept <ADR-id>] [--review full|lean|solo]" user-invocable: true allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Agent, AskUserQuestion, Bash(wc -c *), Bash(bash "*/.claude/skills/architecture-decision/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config *), Bash(bash .claude/scripts/registry.sh *) model: sonnet
!`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density,team.size`
Resolved above — use as-is; `--review` overrides `review_mode`. No block → defaults in `.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`.
When this skill is invoked:
See `.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in `.claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md` — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
Every `AskUserQuestion` call follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md` (collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds; `automation_always_ask` categories always prompt).
**`team.size`**: which agents validate this ADR (orthogonal to review_mode/workflow).
sub-specialist and no adversarial reviewer at any size.
**`docs.density`** — it controls the *depth* of the ADR's prose sections, not which sections the skeleton emits (that is fixed). `modes.rigor` sets it alongside `workflow`; set `docs.density` explicitly to vary ADR verbosity alone: `terse` (the default, via `rigor: minimal`) = decision + alternatives as bullets, one line of rationale each; `balanced` = paragraph per section with light rationale (`rigor: standard`); `thorough` = full prose with trade-offs and worked rationale in Decision, Alternatives, and Consequences. Apply it to the prose sections; the Engine Compatibility, ADR Dependencies, and GDD Requirements tables are structural and stay whole at every density.
**`workflow`** (see `.claude/docs/workflow-modes.md`):
**If the argument starts with `retrofit` followed by a file path**
**Read `references/0-retrofit.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
**If the argument starts with `accept` followed by an ADR id**
**Read `references/0-accept.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
If NOT in retrofit or acceptance mode, proceed to Step 1 below (normal ADR authoring).
**No-argument guard**: If no argument was provided (title is empty), ask before running Phase 0:
> "What technical decision are you documenting? Please provide a short title > (e.g., `event-system-architecture`, `physics-engine-choice`)."
Use the user's response as the title, then proceed to Step 1.
---
**Read `references/1-engine-context.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
Scan `docs/architecture/` for existing ADRs to find the next number.
---
**Read `references/3-gather-context.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
**Read `references/4-decide.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
**Read `references/5-generate.md` now and follow it** — this phase's steps are in that file, not here. Read it again if the conversation was compacted or resumed during this phase.
After the ADR is written (and registry optionally updated), close with `AskUserQuestion`.
Before generating the widget: 1. Read the `## Required ADRs` section of `docs/architecture/architecture.md` (by section) and list `docs/architecture/adr-*.md`: a required ADR with no file is still unwritten. Without `architecture.md`, look for ADRs flagged in technical-preferences.md or systems-index.md as prerequisites 2. Check if all prerequisite ADRs are now written. If yes, include a "Start writing GDDs" option. 3. List ALL remaining priority ADRs as individual options — not just the next one or two.
Widget format:
ADR-[NNNN] written and registry updated. What would you like to do next? [1] Write [next-priority-adr-name] — [brief description from prerequisites list] [2] Write [another-priority-adr] — [brief description] (include ALL remaining ones) [N] Start writing GDDs — run `/design-system [first-undesigned-system]` (only show if all prerequisite ADRs are written) [N+1] Stop here for this session
If there are no remaining priority ADRs and no undesigned GDD systems, offer only "Stop here" and suggest running `/architecture-review` in a fresh session.
**Always include this fixed notice in the closing output (do NOT omit it):**
> To validate ADR coverage against your GDDs, open a **fresh Claude Code session** > and run `/architecture-review`. > > **Never run `/architecture-review` in the same session as `/architecture-decision`.** > The reviewing agent must be independent of the authoring context to give an unbiased > assessment. Running it here would
Turn Claude Code into a full game dev studio — 49 AI agents, 72 workflow skills, and a complete coordination system mirroring real studio hierarchy.
Brownfield audit — do existing artifacts actually work? Numbered migration plan. Unlike /project-stage-detect, checks compliance…
Traceability matrix mapping GDD requirements to ADRs. Finds gaps, cross-ADR conflicts, engine compatibility. PASS/CONCERNS/NOT…
Author the Art Bible — visual identity gating asset production. Run before /map-systems.
Audit assets against naming conventions, file size budgets, format standards. Finds orphaned assets, missing references.
Per-asset visual specs plus AI generation prompts from GDDs and character profiles. After the art bible.
Find balance outliers, broken progressions, degenerate strategies, economy imbalances in formulas and data. 'Check game balance'.
Use your assigned AgentMail inbox to read email tasks, explicitly send or reply, and check delivery. Provided automatically by…
Create a new Architecture Decision Record with sequential numbering and AgentDB registration