game-studio-harness

v2026.09.24

Five-role game production studio harness: director, numeric-balance designer, revenue-band PM, verification-strict programmer, archetype-rotation QA. Runs the 3-stage operating cycle (concept/presentation/core build → balance/core-loop/novelty → ops stability/play impact) behind 8 numeric quality gates with survey-grounded trends, signed designer↔PM negotiation records, and QA broadcast discipline. Writes the repository rule file (CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md) so the contract outlives the session, and keeps one live `_workspace/current/` beside a read-only archive.

GitHub
Install command
npx skhub add akillness/game-studio-harness
Markdown
SKILL.md

Game Studio Harness

Producer-orchestrated 5-agent team for full game production cycles, following the bmad-gds method (intake brief → one operating mode → coordination artifact → specialist routing → milestone thread) with numeric quality gates. The harness is a standing structure: cycles repeat until the game ships and keep repeating for live operation.

Read references/quality-gates.md, references/stage-cycle.md, and references/artifact-contract.md before creating a run. Gate thresholds in references/quality-gates.md override any paraphrase in this guide.

When to use this skill

  • Start a new game production cycle from an idea, GDD, prototype, or existing build
  • Resume an in-flight cycle (read _workspace/current/production/task-manifest.md first)
  • Run a stage-gate review (G1–G8 verdicts) on the current build
  • Reprioritize when playtest feedback, defects, and milestone pressure collide
  • 게임 제작/밸런스/수익화/QA 사이클을 하나의 팀으로 돌릴 때

Route narrower packets to their own skills instead: raw build/log failure → game-build-log-triage; profiler capture → game-performance-profiler; feedback-only triage → game-demo-feedback-triage; store-page/launch ops → steam-store-launch-ops; pre-production ideation → bmad-idea.

Team

RoleTemplateOwns
game-production-directortemplates/agents/game-production-director.mdIntake, task manifest, gate verdicts, arbitration, retrospective
game-designertemplates/agents/game-designer.mdBalance sheet, combo matrix, core loop, novelty scorecard, worldview, presentation spec, trend surveys
game-pmtemplates/agents/game-pm.mdRevenue map, reward bands (comeback ≤30%, free/paid parity 10–20 sessions, win-rate delta ≤5%p), negotiation record, revenue forecast
game-programmertemplates/agents/game-programmer.mdArchitecture contract, perf budget (p95 ≤16.7ms, input ≤100ms), movement-path optimization, tech verification, telemetry, defect responses
game-qatemplates/agents/game-qa.mdArchetype rotation (≥5 types), exploit register, benchmark survey, gate measurements, defect/regression registers

Communication topology: director assigns and gates; QA broadcasts every exploit/discovery to ALL agents with a feedback request; designer↔PM negotiate reward/revenue couplings in a signed record; programmer answers every defect within the cycle (fixed or deferred + reasoning).

Instructions

Step 0: Preparation

Why: every artifact must be traceable, and the workspace has exactly one live folder.

  1. Create _workspace/current/{intake,design,pm,engineering,qa,ops,ui,production,messages,retrospectives}/ at the target repo root. Do not create a dated run directory — run-id ({YYYYMMDD}-{cycle-label}) is a value carried inside the documents and becomes a directory name only at archive time (_workspace/archive/{run-id}/).
  2. If resuming, read _workspace/current/production/task-manifest.md and the last retrospective; enter at the recorded stage instead of Stage 1.
  3. At cycle close, git mv superseded lane material into _workspace/archive/{run-id}/. Never delete a _workspace/ artifact.

Step 0.5: Write the repository rule file

Why: the harness only governs the session that runs it. Everything the studio learns — lane ownership, the engine boundary, which generator owns which asset class, the git-safety protocol — evaporates the moment this session ends unless it is written where every future session must read it.

  1. Copy templates/repo-rules.md to the target repo's agent instruction file (CLAUDE.md for Claude Code; mirror to AGENTS.md for Codex/Gemini/OpenCode as a pointer, not a second copy — two contracts drift, and a drifted contract is worse than none).
  2. Resolve every {PLACEHOLDER} against the real repository. A surviving placeholder is a defect. Delete sections that do not apply: a rule nobody follows teaches future sessions that rules are optional.
  3. State the reason beside any rule whose violation is tempting or whose cost is invisible. Never rename X gets ignored; renaming X orphans every existing player's save data gets obeyed.
  4. Re-derive it at each cycle close, not just at run creation. The rule file is a cycle artifact — when current/ gains a lane, when a generator is replaced, or when a hard-won invariant is discovered, it is stale until updated.

Step 1: Materialize the team

Why: agents must be file-based so sessions can reuse them.

  • Claude Code with CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1: copy templates/agents/*.md into the target repo's .claude/agents/ (skip files that already exist and match), then use TeamCreate + SendMessage + TaskCreate/TaskUpdate.
  • Any other runtime (Codex, Gemini, OpenCode) or teams flag off: run the same roles as sequential sub-agents in the phase order of references/stage-cycle.md; peer messages become numbered files in _workspace/current/messages/{seq}-{from}.md.

Step 2: Intake (director)

Normalize the request into intake/production-brief.md (bmad-gds schema: game_type, team_shape, engine, current_stage, next_public_beat, source_packet, main_constraint, main_question). Choose ONE operating mode for the cycle and state the next public beat explicitly.

Step 3: Run the 3-stage operating cycle

Follow references/stage-cycle.md exactly. Summary:

  • Stage 1 — Concept, presentation, animation, resources, core build: designer (concept + worldview + numeric skeleton + trend survey via the survey skill + core-loop candidate + presentation spec) ∥ PM (revenue-point draft) ∥ QA (benchmark survey + test plan + archetype set). Then designer↔PM negotiation round 1, then programmer builds core loop + presentation/animation + resource manifest + telemetry draft. Gate: G7 draft, G1 draft, G6-ops draft.
  • Stage 2 — Balance, core-loop stability, novelty development: QA exploit hunt across archetypes → designer retune → PM reward-band adjustment → negotiation round 2 → programmer applies data-only changes → QA re-verification. Gate: G2, G3, G5, G7 final, G8.
  • Stage 3 — Ops stability and play impact (연출/시나리오/이펙트): programmer perf+memory+movement optimization and ops hardening ∥ designer+programmer presentation/scenario/effect impact pass ∥ QA full regression + immersion scoring ∥ PM revenue-consistency forecast. Gate: G4, G6 final, G1 final.

Gate verdicts are PASS / FIX (≤2 revision loops) / REDO (previous stage). An open S1 defect or missing evidence blocks any PASS.

Step 4: Cycle close (director)

  1. Write retrospectives/cycle-{n}-retrospective.md: per-gate measured values, unresolved risks, and the next-cycle entry decision (Stage 1 concept shift vs Stage 2 retune).
  2. Re-derive the repository rule file (Step 0.5) if this cycle changed a lane, replaced a generator, or discovered an invariant worth enforcing.
  3. git mv the superseded lane material into _workspace/archive/{run-id}/. current/ keeps only what the next cycle carries forward; nothing leaves _workspace/.

The cycle loops — the studio is a standing structure, not a one-shot pipeline.

Step 5: Error handling

ScenarioResponse
Agent timeoutRetry once → mark task failed, continue partial, flag in gate review
Data conflictLog conflicts.md; prefer newer measurement; director arbitrates numerically
Missing outputGate cannot PASS; warn in review
Messaging failureFile-based fallback via messages/

Examples

Example 1: New cycle from an idea

Input: "다크판타지 RTS 아이디어로 게임 제작 사이클 시작해줘" Expected: run-id created, production brief written, team materialized, Stage 1 tasks assigned; designer trend survey and QA benchmark survey run via the survey skill; cycle ends with retrospective + G1–G8 gate table.

Example 2: Stage-gate review on existing build

Input: "현재 빌드로 스테이지 게이트 리뷰 돌려줘" Expected: QA measures G1–G8 on the build, director issues per-gate PASS/FIX/REDO verdicts with evidence paths, FIX items become manifest tasks.

Example 3: Balance emergency

Input: "QA가 무한조합 익스플로잇 찾음, 사이클 재진입" Expected: enter at Stage 2 Phase 2a with the exploit register pre-seeded; designer retune, PM reward-coupling check, programmer data-only change, QA re-verifies the band before the gate closes.

Best practices

  1. One operating mode per cycle — mixing concept work and launch ops in one pass weakens both.
  2. Numbers gate everything: no adjective ever passes a gate (references/quality-gates.md).
  3. Surveys before invention: designer trend survey and QA benchmark survey are Stage 1 prerequisites, not optional garnish.
  4. Preserve _workspace/ artifacts — they are the studio's memory across cycles. Archive, never delete.
  5. The rule file is the studio's only durable output. A harness run that ships a build but leaves no contract has taught the next session nothing.
  6. Keep the milestone thread: every task names the next public beat it serves.
  7. QA broadcast discipline: every exploit/discovery goes to all agents with an explicit feedback request — QA sense is the studio's shared sense.

References

Discovery
Tags

No tags published for this skill.

Version
Latest version metadata

Version

v2026.09.24

Published

Sep 24, 2026

Category

Uncategorized

License

Not specified

Source path

.agent-skills/game-studio-harness

Default branch

main

Latest commit

f579bfe

Tree SHA

34a09b3