game-design

Game design principles. GDD structure, balancing, player psychology, progression.

Quality

45%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/game-development/game-design/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

50%

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

The body is a well-organized, compact reference of game-design principles with useful heuristics and do/don't guidance, but it largely restates known theory, stays descriptive rather than procedural, and is monolithic with no progressive disclosure to supporting files.

Suggestions

Trim restatements of widely known theory (Bartle types, flow state, reward schedules) and keep only decision-oriented guidance that adds to what Claude already knows.

Convert the highest-value sections (e.g., the 30-second test and GDD checklist) into concrete, step-by-step procedures a designer can follow, rather than descriptive tables.

Split detailed reference material (e.g., full GDD template, reward-schedule examples) into separate bundle files referenced one level deep from SKILL.md to apply progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is compact (tables and short bullets, not padded prose), but it restates well-known game-design theory (Bartle player types, flow state, fixed/variable reward schedules) that Claude already knows, fitting 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'.	2 / 3
Actionability	It offers concrete heuristics (the 30-second test, a do/don't anti-patterns table, a GDD section checklist) but much of it is descriptive taxonomy rather than step-by-step actionable instruction, fitting 'some concrete guidance but incomplete'.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The core loop is a clear 4-step sequence and sections are well ordered, but there is no procedural workflow with validation checkpoints; for a conceptual reference this fits 'sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are clearly organized with headers and tables, but the ~120-line body is a single monolithic file with no external references or file splitting, fitting 'some structure but content that could be separate is inline'.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

40%

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 names the game-design domain and several sub-topics but lacks action verbs and any 'Use when...' trigger guidance, capping both completeness and specificity. It is distinguishable as a niche but relies on generic terms that invite some overlap.

Suggestions

Rewrite as a third-person action phrase with concrete verbs, e.g. 'Designs and balances game loops, structures GDDs, and plans player progression.'

Add an explicit trigger clause: 'Use when designing games, drafting a GDD, or balancing difficulty and progression.'

Add natural trigger variations users would say ('game mechanics', 'level design', 'game balancing') and spell out 'GDD (game design document)' to avoid jargon.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description is a string of noun-phrase topics ('GDD structure, balancing, player psychology, progression') with no action verbs describing what Claude does, matching the 'vague/abstract; no actions' anchor rather than the 'names domain and some actions' level.	1 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill covers but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the guideline completeness is capped at 2 ('has what, but when is missing or only implied').	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	'game design', 'balancing', and 'progression' are natural terms a user might say, but 'GDD' is jargon and common variations ('game mechanics', 'level design') are missing, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Game design is a clear niche, but generic terms like 'balancing' and 'progression' could overlap with other domains and there are no explicit triggers, fitting 'somewhat specific but could still overlap'.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
allowed_tools_field	'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: vudovn/ag-kit
Path: .agents/skills/game-development/game-design/SKILL.md
Commit: 04514f0

Reviewed: about 13 hours 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.