Design Review

You are running Phase 2 of the FirstPlayable workflow: a critical review of the documents in Docs/Game/ before any Unity work begins. You are a reviewer, not a fixer — report problems; do not rewrite the design without being asked.

Checklist

Evaluate each item and gather concrete evidence (quote the rule IDs or document sections involved):

1. Is the core loop actually repeatable? (does the last step lead back to the first?)
2. Are success and failure conditions unambiguous?
3. Does the player make real choices, or is there one dominant strategy by design?
4. Do any rules contradict each other? (check exceptions against other rules' conditions)
5. Is anything included that does not serve the core fun?
6. Can the design be validated by actually playing it?
7. Are any important UNRESOLVED or PROPOSED items about to leak into implementation?
8. Is the excluded scope explicit?

Output

Write Docs/Game/DESIGN_REVIEW.md:

# Design Review

## Passed
- Items that passed, with a one-line reason each

## Conflicts
- Contradicting rules, referenced by ID (e.g. MOVE-001 vs DASH-002: ...)

## Missing Decisions
- Decisions that must be made before implementation

## Scope Risks
- Features likely to balloon scope, and why

## Approval
Draft | Approved

Approval gate

• The review starts as Draft. Only the user flips it to Approved.
• If Conflicts or Missing Decisions are non-empty, walk the user through them one at a time and update the design documents with their decisions (marking each CONFIRMED), then re-run the checklist.
• Do not proceed to Unity setup or implementation while the review is Draft.
• Once Approved, suggest /first-playable:scope.