CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/game-perf-profiling

Profiles game builds against frame-time, memory, GPU draw-call, and GC-spike budgets using Unity Profiler + Profile Analyzer + Performance Testing package and Unreal Insights + stat commands. Establishes pass/fail thresholds (16.6 ms at 60 fps, 33.3 ms at 30 fps), writes automated performance regression tests that run in CI, and emits a structured budget report per SKU. Use when a title must hit a declared frame-time or memory budget before a milestone gate or platform-cert submission, or when a recent change needs a performance regression check.

69

Quality

87%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-structured, highly actionable skill body with concrete code, commands, tables, and validation checkpoints across both engine stacks. Weaknesses are modest: prose-only Unreal CI automation, inline version pins, a repeated caveat, and several citations to bundle files that are not present.

Suggestions

Make the Unreal CI regression step executable: replace the prose description with the actual Automation/Insights command line (e.g., the performance test invocation and trace-export/compare command) so it matches the Unity step's copy-paste quality.

Move time-sensitive version pins (Performance Testing package "3.0.3", Profile Analyzer @1.2) into a reference file or a dedicated versions note so the spine does not drift out of date.

Resolve the dangling citations (platform-cert-overview-reference, unreal-automation-system, godot-gut-tests, docs/PLUGIN_AUTHORING.md) into real relative links or remove them, and drop the duplicate ".pdata does not embed frames" caveat from either Step 1 or Limitations.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and table/code-driven with no concept explanations Claude already knows, but minor inefficiencies remain: time-sensitive version pins ("com.unity.test-framework.performance": "3.0.3", Profile Analyzer @1.2) are inlined rather than isolated, and the ".pdata does not embed frames" caveat is repeated in both Step 1 and Limitations. Anchor 5 ('every token earns its place') is not quite met; it is noticeably above anchor 3's 'some unnecessary explanation'.

4 / 5

Actionability

Mostly executable: complete Measure.Method/Measure.Frames C# samples, an exact `unity -batchmode -runTests` CI command, precise menu paths, and a concrete stat-command table. The gap is the Unreal CI step, which is prose-only ("Combine with a CI step that launches Insights in server mode, runs the target map for N frames...") with no runnable command or script.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 7-step sequence (Unity capture → analyze → automate; Unreal triage → Insights; GPU budgets → CI gate) with explicit checkpoints: Profile Analyzer p99 flagging, the CI fail-the-build condition, and the PASS/FAIL budget report with "A FAIL on p99 triggers a regression investigation before milestone sign-off". Short of anchor 5 because the recovery path after a FAIL is implied rather than an explicit validate→fix→retry loop.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: two real one-level-deep references (references/unity-profiler.md, references/unreal-insights.md) are well-signaled with links and hold the appropriately split module/view detail. The gap is dangling citations — "platform-cert-overview-reference", "unreal-automation-system", "godot-gut-tests", "docs/PLUGIN_AUTHORING.md" — which name files that do not exist in the bundle and are not navigable links.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A strong description: third-person voice, concrete multi-action capability list, explicit dual-trigger 'Use when' clause, and a distinct game-performance niche. The only weakness is modest synonym coverage in trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — "Profiles game builds against frame-time, memory, GPU draw-call, and GC-spike budgets", "Establishes pass/fail thresholds (16.6 ms at 60 fps, 33.3 ms at 30 fps)", "writes automated performance regression tests that run in CI", "emits a structured budget report per SKU" — with comprehensive coverage of profiling, thresholding, CI automation, and reporting. It exceeds anchor 4 ('minor gaps in coverage') because every declared capability is a specific, verifiable action.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Profiles game builds against... budgets", "Establishes pass/fail thresholds", "writes automated performance regression tests", "emits a structured budget report per SKU") and when ("Use when a title must hit a declared frame-time or memory budget before a milestone gate or platform-cert submission, or when a recent change needs a performance regression check"). The 'when' clause contains two concrete trigger scenarios.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keyword coverage: "frame-time", "memory", "GPU draw-call", "GC-spike", "performance regression", "milestone gate", "platform-cert submission", plus tool names (Unity Profiler, Unreal Insights). Falls short of anchor 5 because a few common user phrasings — "fps", "optimization", "stutter/lag" — are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche: game-engine performance budget verification with named Unity and Unreal tooling. Triggers like "frame-time or memory budget before a milestone gate" are domain-specific and unlikely to fire for a generic profiling, testing, or CI skill.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents