Translate approved game designs into a technical blueprint before coding begins. Map system layers, module responsibilities, data flow, and API boundaries, then check architecture decisions against the pinned engine and identify missing knowledge or decisions.
Author the architecture blueprint before code is written. Validates decisions against the pinned engine, flags knowledge gaps.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,workflow,docs.density
Resolved above — use as-is; --review overrides review_mode. No block →
defaults in .claude/docs/config-resolution.md.
This skill produces docs/architecture/architecture.md — the master architecture
document that translates all approved GDDs into a concrete technical blueprint.
It sits between design and implementation, and must exist before sprint planning begins.
Distinct from /architecture-decision: ADRs record individual point decisions.
This skill creates the whole-system blueprint that gives ADRs their context.
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).
docs.density — it controls per-section depth, where workflow
controls which sections exist. modes.rigor sets both together; set
docs.density explicitly to vary depth alone: terse (the default, via rigor: minimal) = layer diagrams + decision bullets,
no essays; balanced = diagrams + paragraph explanations of layer choices
(rigor: standard); thorough = full prose with rationale, trade-offs, and alternatives
considered per layer. Apply it to every section you author.
workflow (see .claude/docs/workflow-modes.md):
full — full architecture: all layers, module ownership, data flow, API
boundaries, full ADR audit.standard — simplified: system layer map + critical ADR list only.minimal — not required. Can still be run voluntarily.Argument modes:
full: Full guided walkthrough — all sections, start to finishlayers: Focus on the system layer diagram onlydata-flow: Focus on data flow between modules onlyapi-boundaries: Focus on API boundary definitions onlyadr-audit: Audit existing ADRs for engine compatibility gaps onlyRead references/0-load-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/1-layers.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/2-module-ownership.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/3-data-flow.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-api-boundaries.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-adr-audit.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/6-missing-adrs.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/7-write.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/8-handoff.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.
Applies in collaborative mode (the default). For guided and
autonomous modes, see .claude/docs/automation-modes.md — the rules below
describe what collaborative mode requires, not universal behavior.
This skill follows the collaborative design principle at every phase:
AskUserQuestion for write approvals — plain text "May I?" is not
sufficient. Use the structured tool with labeled options [A]/[B]/[C] (write now /
show full draft first / not yet). For multi-file changesets, list every file
and what changes, then ask once grouped — not separate plain-text asks per file.production/session-state/active.md as you go, so a crash loses no decision.
A revision that Phase 7b forces is written the same way — once, after its
re-drafted sections are approved — and an update (Phase 0e) writes only the
sections it chose.Never make a binding architectural decision without user input. If the user is unsure, present 2-4 options with pros/cons before asking them to decide.
/architecture-decision [title] for each required ADR listed in Phase 6 — Foundation layer ADRs first/architecture-review — bootstraps the Requirements Traceability Matrix and TR registry from the ADRs just written. Required before the Pre-Production gate./test-setup to scaffold tests/unit/, tests/integration/, CI workflow, and an example test (required for gate-check)/ux-design to initialize design/ux/interaction-patterns.md and design/accessibility-requirements.md (required for gate-check)/create-control-manifest once the required ADRs are written to produce the layer rules manifest/gate-check pre-production when all required ADRs, /test-setup, and /ux-design are completeNo reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Audit an existing project's design documents and supporting files to check whether their formats work with the template's skills. Get a numbered migration plan that prioritizes gaps and required changes, rather than simply listing what exists.
Document a technical decision in an architecture decision record, or ADR. Capture its context, alternatives, and consequences, assign a record number, and distinguish a proposed decision from an accepted one so dependent work reflects its actual status.
Review whether game design requirements are covered by documented architecture decisions. Identify missing coverage, conflicting decisions, and engine compatibility concerns, with an optional matrix linking requirements to development stories and tests.
Create a game's art direction document, defining its visual rules, mood, shapes, colors, and production standards. Review and approve sections individually, with guidance that connects character, environment, and interface design to the game's concept and technical constraints.
Audit game asset files for naming rules, size limits, formats, and broken references. Receive a report of measured violations and suggested fixes, with clear explanations of checks that lack data or cannot be assessed for the engine.
Turn game design documents and character profiles into asset specifications and image generation prompts. Define appearance, dimensions, file formats, and naming rules, then maintain an asset list that tracks progress and identifies shared assets.