review-all-gdds

Holistic cross-GDD consistency and game design review. Reads all system GDDs simultaneously and checks for contradictions between them, stale references, ownership conflicts, formula incompatibilities, and game design theory violations (dominant strategies, economic imbalance, cognitive overload, pillar drift). Run after all MVP GDDs are written, before architecture begins.

Quality

88%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is highly actionable and clearly sequenced with strong validation and error-recovery feedback loops, but it is a lengthy monolithic file that does not practice progressive disclosure — large checklists and example templates are inline with no bundle-file references to offload them.

Suggestions

Move the long per-category example output templates (Phases 2-4 ⚠️/🔴 blocks) and the full report template into a references/ file (e.g. REPORT_TEMPLATE.md) referenced one level deep, trimming the main SKILL.md to the procedure.

Tighten the repeated emoji-templated example blocks — keep one canonical example per issue type rather than restating the full template under each subsection.

Consider splitting the Phase 3 design-theory checklists (dominant strategy, economy, difficulty curves, pillar alignment) into a separate reference so the core workflow fits a leaner overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows (no 'what is a GDD' preamble), but it runs ~640 lines with many repeated emoji-templated example output blocks (⚠️/🔴) and full report templates that could be tightened, matching the score-2 anchor of 'mostly efficient but could be tightened'.	2 / 3
Actionability	It gives concrete executable guidance throughout — exact Grep/Read/git commands, explicit file paths, per-phase checklists, literal AskUserQuestion prompts, and a copy-ready report template — matching the score-3 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Seven phases are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints (the <2-GDD stop condition in Phase 1c, registry baseline checks, an Error Recovery Protocol with retry/skip/stop options, and AskUserQuestion gating on writes), matching the score-3 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps and feedback loops' anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	It is a single monolithic SKILL.md with no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundle files; the detailed per-system checklists and long example output blocks are all inline and could be split into one-level-deep reference files, matching the score-2 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor rather than the score-3 split-with-navigation pattern.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific, trigger-rich, complete, and clearly distinct from sibling skills. It names concrete checks and gives explicit pipeline-stage trigger guidance for both what and when.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It enumerates multiple concrete actions — 'checks for contradictions between them, stale references, ownership conflicts, formula incompatibilities, and game design theory violations (dominant strategies, economic imbalance, cognitive overload, pillar drift)' — mirroring the score-3 anchor that 'lists multiple specific concrete actions'.	3 / 3
Completeness	It answers both what ('Reads all system GDDs simultaneously and checks for...') and when ('Run after all MVP GDDs are written, before architecture begins'), providing explicit trigger guidance equivalent to a 'Use when...' clause, satisfying the score-3 anchor; not capped at 2 because the trigger guidance is explicit rather than missing.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural domain terms a user would say are present — 'cross-GDD consistency', 'game design review', 'system GDDs', 'contradictions', 'stale references' — giving good coverage of the terms this audience would use, matching the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'Holistic cross-GDD consistency' framing carves a clear niche distinct from a per-GDD /design-review (which the body explicitly contrasts), so it is unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill, matching the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (640 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios
Path: .claude/skills/review-all-gdds/SKILL.md
Commit: 984023d

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.