design-review

A game design document consistency check validates formulas, edge-case logic, and cross-system interactions to ensure details are precise enough to implement. It audits required sections like rules, dependencies, and acceptance criteria, producing a structured review verdict with blocking fixes.

You can validate dependency references by running a dependency graph validation that verifies each declared dependency's GDD file exists on disk. This prevents downstream broken references by checking dependency integrity across related design documents.

Run a GDD review during pre-production submission or after revisions to catch missing or contradictory parts early. An implementation readiness check reduces back-and-forth and prevents programmers from building an ambiguous or unbuildable spec.

Yes, full mode delegates to domain specialists like game designers, systems designers, and QA leads to synthesize a senior verdict. This adversarial specialist review tracks explicit disagreements and identifies complex design gaps across cross-system interactions.

Yes, re-review awareness detects and references existing review logs to see what was previously blocked. This checks whether specific issues have been resolved in the current GDD revision, ensuring continuous implementation readiness across iterative updates.

Full mode spawns specialist agent tasks for adversarial review, while lean and solo modes provide faster systems analysis without delegation. You set the desired depth mode when running the review on a specific GDD path to balance thoroughness and processing speed.