design-review

Review game design documents for completeness, consistency, and implementability.

Updated May 13, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/FrancisVarga/the-dream-machine --skill design-review-francisvarga
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: design-review
Source: https://github.com/FrancisVarga/the-dream-machine/tree/main/.claude/skills/design-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/FrancisVarga/the-dream-machine --skill design-review-francisvarga

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill prevents incomplete or internally inconsistent game design documents from reaching programmers by performing a structured review focused on completeness, implementability, and cross-system consistency.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Argument-controlled review depth with --depth full|lean|solo to match your time budget and whether specialist delegation is allowed.
  • Standards-based completeness checks against a required design document checklist (overview, player fantasy, rules, formulas, edge cases, dependencies, tuning knobs, acceptance criteria).
  • Dependency graph validation that verifies referenced GDDs exist on disk and flags broken references early.
  • Consistency and implementability analysis covering formula behavior, edge-case contradictions, underspecification, and potential downstream implementation risks.
  • Full-mode specialist delegation (when --depth full) that runs adversarial reviews via subagents and surfaces disagreements explicitly.

Quick Start

Run design-review on your GDD by calling /design-review path/to/design/gdd/some-system.md --depth full.

Frequently Asked Questions about design-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review a game design document for completeness and implementability before coding starts?

Checking a GDD for internal consistency involves analyzing formula behavior, identifying edge-case contradictions, verifying referenced dependency files exist on disk via filesystem globbing, and flagging underspecification to prevent downstream implementation risks.

What is the best way to validate cross-system dependencies in game design documents?

Validating cross-system dependencies in game design documents requires checking referenced GDDs on disk using filesystem globbing to detect broken references early, ensuring all external system dependencies exist before passing the design to programmers.

Can I run a lean GDD consistency review without using specialist subagents?

Running a full GDD review with `--depth full` delegates adversarial analysis to specialist subagents, running parallel reviews that surface disagreements explicitly in a structured specialist disagreement report alongside tracked blocking and recommended findings.

Does design review work with GDDs that lack explicit acceptance criteria and tuning knobs?

The GDD review process has limitations when the document is missing related context, as the validation requires parsing the design document and its dependencies to produce a structured verdict with tracked blocking and recommended findings.