Guided Onboarding
This skill writes up to two files:
production/stage.txt — set to exploration when user picks Path E (pre-workflow exploration).production/review-mode.txt — review mode config (set in Phase 3b, skipped for Path E).
This skill is the entry point for new users. It does NOT assume you have a game idea, an engine preference, or any prior experience. It asks first, then routes you to the right workflow.
Phase 1: Detect Project State
Before asking anything, silently gather context so you can tailor your guidance. Do NOT show these results unprompted — they inform your recommendations, not the conversation opener.
Check:
- Engine configured? Read
docs/framework/technical-preferences.md. If the Engine field contains [TO BE CONFIGURED], the engine is not set.
- Game concept exists? Check for
design/gdd/game-concept.md.
- Source code exists? Glob for source files in
src/ (*.gd, *.cs, *.cpp, *.h, *.rs, *.py, *.js, *.ts).
- Prototypes exist? Check for subdirectories in
prototypes/.
- Design docs exist? Count markdown files in
design/gdd/.
- Production artifacts? Check for files in
production/sprints/ or production/milestones/.
Store these findings internally to validate the user's self-assessment and tailor recommendations.
Phase 2: Ask Where the User Is
This is the first thing the user sees. Use question with these exact options so the user can click rather than type:
- Prompt: "Welcome to Claude Code Game Studios! Before I suggest anything, I'd like to understand where you're starting from. Where are you at with your game idea right now?"
- Options:
A) No idea yet — I don't have a game concept at all. I want to explore and figure out what to make.B) Vague idea — I have a rough theme, feeling, or genre in mind (e.g., "something with space" or "a cozy farming game") but nothing concrete.C) Clear concept — I know the core idea — genre, basic mechanics, maybe a pitch sentence — but haven't formalized it into documents yet.D) Existing work — I already have design docs, prototypes, code, or significant planning done. I want to organize or continue the work.E) Multiple ideas — I have 2-4 rough game ideas and want to prototype them quickly before committing to a specific workflow.
Wait for the user's selection. Do not proceed until they respond.
Phase 3: Route Based on Answer
If A: No idea yet
The user needs creative exploration before anything else.
- Acknowledge that starting from zero is completely fine
- Briefly explain what
/concept-brainstorm does (guided ideation using professional frameworks — MDA, player psychology, verb-first design). Mention that it has two modes: /concept-brainstorm open for fully open exploration, or /concept-brainstorm [hint] if they have even a vague theme (e.g., "space", "cozy", "horror").
- Recommend running
/concept-brainstorm open as the next step, but invite them to use a hint if something comes to mind
- Show the recommended path:
Concept phase:
/concept-brainstorm open — discover your game concept/setup-engine — configure the engine (brainstorm will recommend one)/art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)/map-systems — decompose the concept into systems/design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system/review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check/gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work
Architecture phase:/create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list/architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list/create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet/architecture-review — validate architecture coverage
Pre-Production phase:/ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)/prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic/playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session/create-epics — map systems to epics/create-stories — break epics into implementable stories/sprint-plan — plan the first sprint
Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story
If B: Vague idea
- Ask them to share their vague idea — even a few words is enough
- Validate the idea as a starting point (don't judge or redirect)
- Recommend running
/concept-brainstorm [their hint] to develop it
- Show the recommended path:
Concept phase:
/concept-brainstorm [hint] — develop the idea into a full concept/setup-engine — configure the engine/art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)/map-systems — decompose the concept into systems/design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system/review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check/gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work
Architecture phase:/create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list/architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list/create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet/architecture-review — validate architecture coverage
Pre-Production phase:/ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)/prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic/playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session/create-epics — map systems to epics/create-stories — break epics into implementable stories/sprint-plan — plan the first sprint
Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story
If C: Clear concept
- Ask them to describe their concept in one sentence — genre and core mechanic. Use plain text, not question (it's an open response).
- Acknowledge the concept, then use
question to offer two paths:
- Prompt: "How would you like to proceed?"
- Options:
Formalize it first — Run /concept-brainstorm [concept] to structure it into a proper game concept documentJump straight in — Go to /setup-engine now and write the GDD manually afterward
- Show the recommended path:
Concept phase:
/concept-brainstorm or /setup-engine — (their pick from step 2)/art-bible — define visual identity (after brainstorm if run, or after concept doc exists)/design-review — validate the concept doc/map-systems — decompose the concept into individual systems/design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system/review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check/gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work
Architecture phase:/create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list/architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list/create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet/architecture-review — validate architecture coverage
Pre-Production phase:/ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)/prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic/playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session/create-epics — map systems to epics/create-stories — break epics into implementable stories/sprint-plan — plan the first sprint
Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story
If D: Existing work
-
Share what you found in Phase 1:
- "I can see you have [X source files / Y design docs / Z prototypes]..."
- "Your engine is [configured as X / not yet configured]..."
-
Sub-case D1 — Early stage (engine not configured or only a game concept exists):
- Recommend
/setup-engine first if engine not configured
- Then
/project-stage-detect for a gap inventory
Sub-case D2 — GDDs, ADRs, or stories already exist:
- Explain: "Having files isn't the same as the template's skills being able to use them. GDDs might be missing required sections.
/adopt checks this specifically."
- Recommend:
/project-stage-detect — understand what phase and what's missing entirely/adopt — audit whether existing artifacts are in the right internal format
-
Show the recommended path for D2:
/project-stage-detect — phase detection + existence gaps/adopt — format compliance audit + migration plan/setup-engine — if engine not configured/design-system retrofit [path] — fill missing GDD sections/architecture-decision retrofit [path] — add missing ADR sections/architecture-review — bootstrap the TR requirement registry/gate-check — validate readiness for next phase
If E: Multiple ideas to explore
The user wants to explore several rough ideas before committing to a workflow.
-
Acknowledge that prototyping before committing is a good approach
-
Briefly explain what /explore does (pre-workflow rapid prototyping — build throwaway prototypes in prototypes/explore/, produces lightweight REPORT.md per idea, no workflow commitment, 1-2 days per idea)
-
Recommend running /explore [idea-name] for their first idea, then more for subsequent ideas
-
Show the recommended path:
Pre-workflow exploration:
/explore idea-a — build a prototype for the first idea (1-2 days)/explore idea-b — build a prototype for the second idea (1-2 days)/explore idea-c — (optional) build a prototype for the third idea- Review reports in
prototypes/explore/*/REPORT.md
/gate-check workflow-selection — compare results and choose Hybrid or Full OCGS
-
Do NOT ask about engine preferences, review modes, or any workflow-specific setup. The user is in pre-workflow exploration.
-
Write production/stage.txt with value exploration so that /help and other skills know the project is in the exploration phase. Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.
This is the only file Path E writes. No production/review-mode.txt is created.
Phase 3b: Set Review Mode
If the user chose Path E (exploration): Skip this phase entirely. No review mode is needed for pre-workflow exploration. Proceed directly to Phase 4.
For all other paths: Check if production/review-mode.txt already exists.
If it exists: Read it and show the current mode — "Review mode is set to [current]." — then proceed to Phase 4. Do not ask again.
If it does not exist: Use question:
- Prompt: "One setup choice: how much design review would you want as you work through the workflow?"
- Options:
Full — Director specialists review at each key workflow step. Best for teams, learning the workflow, or when you want thorough feedback on every decision.Lean (recommended) — Directors only at phase gate transitions (/gate-check). Skips per-skill reviews. Balanced approach for solo devs and small teams.Solo — No director reviews at all. Maximum speed. Best for game jams, prototypes, or if the reviews feel like overhead.
Write the choice to production/review-mode.txt immediately after the user
selects — no separate "May I write?" needed, as the write is a direct
consequence of the selection:
Full → write fullLean (recommended) → write leanSolo → write solo
Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.
Phase 4: Confirm Before Proceeding
After presenting the recommended path, use question to ask the user which step they'd like to take first. Never auto-run the next skill.
- Prompt: "Would you like to start with [recommended first step]?"
- Options:
Yes, let's start with [recommended first step]I'd like to do something else first
Phase 5: Hand Off
When the user confirms their next step, respond with a single short line: "Type [skill command] to begin." Nothing else. Do not re-explain the skill or add encouragement. The /start skill's job is done.
Verdict: COMPLETE — user oriented and handed off to next step.
Edge Cases
- User picks D but project is empty: Gently redirect — "It looks like the project is a fresh template with no artifacts yet. Would Path A or B be a better fit?"
- User picks A but project has code: Mention what you found — "I noticed there's already code in
src/. Did you mean to pick D (existing work)?"
- User is returning (engine configured, concept exists): Skip onboarding entirely — "It looks like you're already set up! Your engine is [X] and you have a game concept at
design/gdd/game-concept.md. Review mode: [read from production/review-mode.txt, or 'lean (default)' if missing]. Want to pick up where you left off? Try /sprint-plan or just tell me what you'd like to work on."
- User is returning with exploration stage (
production/stage.txt reads exploration): Skip full onboarding — "It looks like you're exploring game ideas! You have [N] explore prototypes in prototypes/explore/. Want to run /explore [another-idea], or are you ready to run /gate-check workflow-selection to choose a workflow?"
- User picks E but has existing project artifacts: Detect if
production/stage.txt already has a non-exploration value. If so, warn: "It looks like you already have a project in the [phase] phase. Did you mean to continue that work (Path D) instead?"
- User doesn't fit any option: Let them describe their situation in their own words and adapt.
Collaborative Protocol
- Ask first — never assume the user's state or intent
- Present options — give clear paths, not mandates
- User decides — they pick the direction
- No auto-execution — recommend the next skill, don't run it without asking
- Adapt — if the user's situation doesn't fit a template, listen and adjust