content-audit
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Audit GDD-specified content counts against implemented content. Identifies what's planned vs built. ShiningPlague-adopted: project data paths ({{DATA_DIR}}/enemies/, {{DATA_DIR}}/items/, etc.), with data/_schemas/system_registry.json as the entity-level source of truth.
25 other projects use a version of this, 8 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- risukisu/marketing-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiosedited, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- robritacca-dotcom/rift-dstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketingtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- robritacca-dotcom/design-systemtheir own version, first seen Oct 28, 2026
- microsoft/frontier-ghcp-rvastheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use soak-test, team-live-ops and 2 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
lilangMaxSkillsoak-test
Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.
Also in 9 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillteam-live-ops
Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.
Also in 9 projects that use this
- +2 more from lilangMax
Other versions25 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 8
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27k17% same
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 11843% same
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 1742% same
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 843% same
- hongyuanc/codex-game-studios★ 537% same
- dawn840705/claude-code-studios★ 143% same
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugin★ 143% same
- venus2099/codex-game-studios★ 118% same
Wrote their own version · 17
- Ootto-AI/claude-content-skills★ 417same name
- OffchainLabs/arbitrum-docs★ 252same name
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- huifer/AdSense-Readiness-Benchmark★ 14same name
- brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketing★ 9same name
- robritacca-dotcom/rift-ds★ 9same name
- greglas75/zuvo★ 7same name
- Muvon/octomind-tap★ 6same name
- risukisu/marketing-skills★ 6same name
- microsoft/frontier-ghcp-rvas★ 5same name
7 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository68 other files it gives its agents.
- adoptSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- art-bibleSkill
- asset-specSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- bug-reportSkill
- bug-triageSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- consistency-checkSkill
- create-architectureSkill
- create-control-manifestSkill
- create-epicsSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- day-one-patchSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- estimateSkill
- executing-plansSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- gate-checkSkill
- goal-add-minorSkill
- goal-checkSkill
- goal-setSkill
- godot-engineSkill
- helpSkill
- map-systemsSkill
- narrative-designerSkill
- project-stage-detectSkill
- propagate-design-changeSkill
- qa-planSkill
- quick-designSkill
- red-flag-scanSkill
- regression-suiteSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- review-all-gddsSkill
- safety-pushSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- session-closeSkill
- setup-engineSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- story-readinessSkill
- subagent-driven-developmentSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- team-artSkill
- team-audioSkill
- team-combatSkill
- team-economySkill
- team-infraSkill
- team-levelSkill
- team-marketingSkill
- team-narrativeSkill
- team-polishSkill
- team-releaseSkill
- team-securitySkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 24 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
When this skill is invoked, parse the argument:
- Distinctive: line 23
No argument → full audit across all systems
- Very specific: line 54
L0 pre-scan: Before full-reading any GDDs, Grep for ## Summary + content-count keywords:
- Distinctive: line 64
For each GDD, extract explicit content counts/lists: Look for:
- Distinctive: line 193
After writing the report:
- Very specific: line 196
If yes: for each system, suggest a story title + point to /create-stories [epic-slug] or /quick-design depending on size.
- Very specific: line 207
If any system is NOT STARTED and MVP-tagged → "Run /design-system [name] to add missing content counts to GDD before implementation begins."
- Very specific: line 208
If total gap is >50% → "Run /sprint-plan to allocate content work across upcoming sprints."
- Very specific: line 209
If backlog stories needed → "Run /create-stories [epic-slug] for each HIGH PRIORITY gap."
- Very specific: line 210
If --summary was used → "Run /content-audit (no flag) to write full report to docs/."
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 24 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Content Audit
🌱 ShiningPlague-adopted. Originally Donchitos; battle-tested on a shipped Godot project. Upstream procedure preserved + project data paths + registry-as-authority.
When this skill is invoked, parse the argument:
- No argument → full audit across all systems
[system-name]→ audit that single system only--summary→ summary table only, no file write
If an artifact named here is absent: say so plainly in one line, skip that step, and continue. Never invent the file to satisfy a checklist, and never fail a close because an optional artifact was never created.
Project Paths
| What | Canonical path |
| Systems index | docs/gdd/systems-index.md |
| Per-system GDDs | docs/gdd/*.md + {{GDD_PATH}} (master, e.g. docs/GDD.md) |
| Enemy data | {{DATA_DIR}}/enemies/ |
| Item data | {{DATA_DIR}}/items/ |
| Loot tables | {{DATA_DIR}}/loot_tables/ |
| NPC / character data | {{DATA_DIR}}/npcs/ |
| Entity-level authority | data/_schemas/system_registry.json |
Project Content Inventory
- List each populated
{{DATA_DIR}}/<content-type>/directory and its JSON file count (e.g.{{DATA_DIR}}/enemies/,{{DATA_DIR}}/quest-log/,{{DATA_DIR}}/locations/). - Content counts come from GDD + checked against actual JSON file counts.
Phase 1 — Context Gathering
- Read
docs/gdd/systems-index.mdfor the full list of systems, categories, MVP/priority tier. - L0 pre-scan: Before full-reading any GDDs, Grep for
## Summary+ content-count keywords:
Single-system audit: skip and go straight to full-read. Full audit: full-read only GDDs that matched content-count keywords.Grep pattern="(## Summary|N enemies|N levels|N items|N abilities|enemy types|item types|N quests|N locations)" glob="docs/gdd/*.md" output_mode="files_with_matches" Grep pattern="(## Summary|N enemies|N levels|N items|N quests|N locations)" path="{{GDD_PATH}}" output_mode="content" - Full-read in-scope GDD files (or single system GDD if name given).
- For each GDD, extract explicit content counts/lists. Look for:
- "N enemies" / "enemy types:" / named enemies list
- "N levels" / "N areas" / "N maps" / "N stages"
- "N items" / "N weapons" / "N equipment pieces"
- "N abilities" / "N skills" / "N spells"
- Any project-specific content nouns (e.g. "N locations", "N enemy archetypes")
- "N dialogue scenes" / "N conversations" / "N cutscenes"
- "N quests" / "N missions" / "N objectives"
- Any explicit enumerated bullet list of named content pieces
Build a content inventory table:
System Content Type Specified Count/List Source GDD Unspecified counts get "Unspecified" and a flag — design gap.
Phase 2 — Implementation Scan
Enemies:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/enemies/*.json - Count unique files
Locations:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/locations/*.json
Items / Equipment / Loot:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/items/*.json,{{DATA_DIR}}/loot_tables/*.json
Characters / NPCs:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/npcs/*.json
Dialogue / Conversations / Cutscenes:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/dialogue/*.json,{{DATA_DIR}}/scenes/*.json
Quests / Missions:
- Glob
{{DATA_DIR}}/quests/*.json,{{DATA_DIR}}/missions/*.json
Any other populated {{DATA_DIR}}/<content-type>/ directory:
- Glob and count per directory
Scenes (Godot):
- Glob
scenes/**/*.tscn - Distinguish gameplay scenes from UI/system scenes via subdirectory naming
Engine-specific notes (acknowledge in report):
- Counts are approximations
- Scene files include both gameplay and system/UI scenes; scan counts all, notes caveat
Phase 3 — Gap Report
| System | Content Type | Specified | Found | Gap | Status |
|--------|-------------|-----------|-------|-----|--------|Status categories:
COMPLETE— Found ≥ Specified (100%+)IN PROGRESS— Found is 50–99% of SpecifiedEARLY— Found is 1–49% of SpecifiedNOT STARTED— Found is 0
Priority flags:
Flag HIGH PRIORITY if:
- Status is
NOT STARTEDorEARLY, AND - System is tagged MVP or Vertical Slice, OR
- Systems index shows system is blocking downstream systems
Summary line:
- Total content items specified (sum of Specified)
- Total content items found (sum of Found)
- Overall gap percentage:
(Specified - Found) / Specified * 100
Phase 4 — Output
Full audit and single-system modes
Present gap table and summary. Ask: "May I write the full report to docs/content-audit-[YYYY-MM-DD].md?"
If yes, write:
# Content Audit — [Date]
## Summary
- **Total specified**: [N] content items across [M] systems
- **Total found**: [N]
- **Gap**: [N] items ([X%] unimplemented)
- **Scope**: [Full audit | System: name]
> Note: Counts are approximations based on file scanning.
> The audit cannot distinguish shipped content from editor/test assets.
> Manual verification is recommended for any HIGH PRIORITY gaps.
## Gap Table
| System | Content Type | Specified | Found | Gap | Status |
|--------|-------------|-----------|-------|-----|--------|
## HIGH PRIORITY Gaps
[List systems flagged HIGH PRIORITY with rationale]
## Per-System Breakdown
### [System Name]
- **GDD**: `docs/gdd/[file].md` or `{{GDD_PATH}} §[section]`
- **Content types audited**: [list]
- **Notes**: [caveats]
## Recommendation
Focus implementation effort on:
1. [Highest-gap HIGH PRIORITY system]
2. [Second system]
3. [Third system]
## Unspecified Content Counts
The following GDDs describe content without giving explicit counts:
[List of GDDs and content types with "Unspecified"]After writing the report:
"Would you like to create backlog stories for any of the content gaps?"
If yes: for each system, suggest a story title + point to /create-stories [epic-slug] or /quick-design depending on size.
--summary mode
Print Gap Table and Summary directly to conversation. Don't write a file.
End with: "Run /content-audit without --summary to write the full report."
Phase 5 — Next Steps
- If any system is
NOT STARTEDand MVP-tagged → "Run/design-system [name]to add missing content counts to GDD before implementation begins." - If total gap is >50% → "Run
/sprint-planto allocate content work across upcoming sprints." - If backlog stories needed → "Run
/create-stories [epic-slug]for each HIGH PRIORITY gap." - If
--summarywas used → "Run/content-audit(no flag) to write full report todocs/."
Verdict: COMPLETE — content audit finished.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

