balance-check
Skill40 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Analyze pricing tiers, paywall configs, A/B test variants, and feature-flag values for outliers, broken funnels, dominant variants, and monetization imbalance. Use after editing pricing, paywall copy, or any growth-experiment config.
13 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiostheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 19, 2026
- venus2099/codex-game-studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- Swih/godot-foundrytheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- scotidev/GameDevStudiotheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 5, 2026
Other versions13 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 13
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- pixel-cellar/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 324same name
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 118same name
- CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 19same name
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 17same name
- CodePhobiia/claude-roblox-game-studio★ 9same name
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 8same name
- hongyuanc/codex-game-studios★ 5same name
- dawn840705/claude-code-studios★ 1same name
- HunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugin★ 1same name
3 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 repository77 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- design/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- docs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- src/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- tests/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adoptSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- asset-auditSkill
- asset-specSkill
- brainstormSkill
- bug-reportSkill
- bug-triageSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- consistency-checkSkill
- content-auditSkill
- create-architectureSkill
- create-control-manifestSkill
- create-epicsSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- day-one-patchSkill
- design-bibleSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- estimateSkill
- extractSkill
- gate-checkSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- launch-checklistSkill
- localizeSkill
- map-systemsSkill
- milestone-reviewSkill
- onboardSkill
- patch-notesSkill
- perf-profileSkill
- prd-reviewSkill
- project-stage-detectSkill
- propagate-design-changeSkill
- prototypeSkill
- qa-planSkill
- quick-designSkill
- regression-suiteSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- reverse-documentSkill
- review-all-prdsSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- setup-frameworkSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- skill-testSkill
- smoke-checkSkill
- soak-testSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 36
If nothing is found, ask the user to point at the relevant file or folder.
- Distinctive: line 65
If multiple paywall variants exist, build a comparison table:
- Distinctive: line 83
Read experiment definitions.
- Distinctive: line 138
If the funnel skips server-side receipt validation, that is P0 (revenue risk).
- Very specific: line 172
Ask before writing to production/balance/balance-check-[date].md.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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
Balance Check
Pricing and growth experiments are the app's economic balance. This skill reads the configuration, applies sanity checks (outliers, illogical funnels, dominant variants, missing fallbacks), and flags issues before they ship to production.
Phase 1: Locate Config
Read in parallel:
- Pricing config files — typical paths:
assets/data/pricing.json,src/config/pricing.ts,lib/config/pricing.dart,Resources/pricing.plist,res/raw/pricing.xml. - Paywall variant config —
assets/paywalls/*.json,src/config/paywalls/*. - Feature flags — local defaults file, plus the cloud provider
reference (Firebase Remote Config, LaunchDarkly, ConfigCat,
Statsig). The cloud values may live in
production/configs/. - Experiment definitions —
production/experiments/*.mdor whatever the project uses. - The PRDs that govern monetization —
design/prd/monetization.prd.md,design/prd/paywall.prd.md.
If nothing is found, ask the user to point at the relevant file or folder.
Phase 2: Pricing Sanity
For each pricing tier configuration, check:
- Currency is set per supported region.
- Each price has a fallback for App Store / Play Store SKU.
- Annual prices are at most 12x monthly; if higher, surface as a bug (probably an inverted unit). If lower than 8x monthly, the annual is essentially "always buy annual" — flag dominance.
- Trial duration is reasonable (1-30 days). 0-day trials should be removed unless intentional.
- Discount percentages match parent vs current price arithmetic
(no
was $9.99 / now $14.99type errors). - Each tier maps to a defined SKU on both App Store Connect and Play Console (cross-reference the SKU IDs).
- No tier is reachable only through deprecated paths (paywall variant the app no longer renders).
- Localized prices are not silently in USD — confirm
priceLocalehandling.
Phase 3: Paywall Variant Audit
If multiple paywall variants exist, build a comparison table:
| Variant | Headline | CTA | Price tiers shown | Trial | Default for cohort |
Check:
- No two variants have identical render and cohort. (Suggests dead experiment.)
- Each variant ID is referenced in the experiment registry.
- Each variant has localized strings present (cross-check with
/localize). - CTA copy is differentiated; if identical CTAs across variants, the experiment cannot measure CTA-driven impact.
Phase 4: Experiment Health
Read experiment definitions. Per experiment:
- Hypothesis is stated.
- Primary metric is named.
- Sample size or duration is specified.
- Stop conditions are defined (early-stop on harm, max duration).
- Variant allocations sum to 100%.
- No two active experiments target the same primary metric without coordinated layering — surface conflict if found.
- No experiment depends on a feature flag that is also being modified by another active experiment.
Surface:
- Dominant-variant risk: when historical telemetry (if accessible at
production/analytics/) shows one variant outperforming the others by > 30% on the primary metric, flag the experiment for early promotion. - Long-tail risk: experiments running > 30 days without action.
Phase 5: Feature Flag Hygiene
For each flag in the local defaults:
- Default value matches what the cloud config will fall back to when offline.
- No flag toggles risky behavior with a default of ON unless that is explicitly intended.
- No flag is referenced in code but missing from the defaults file (would crash on offline first launch).
- No flag exists in defaults but unused in code (dead flag — open a story to remove).
- Each flag is owned (annotation or doc comment with team name).
Render dead-flag list and ask user whether to clean up.
Phase 6: Funnel Sanity
Walk the monetization funnel against the PRD:
- Trigger (onboarding end, content gate, etc.).
- Paywall variant rendered.
- Tier selected.
- Purchase attempted.
- Purchase confirmed.
- Receipt validated server-side.
- Entitlement granted.
For each step, confirm the analytics event exists (grep for the named events) and is wired. Missing events break attribution.
If the funnel skips server-side receipt validation, that is P0 (revenue risk).
Phase 7: Render Report
# Balance Check — [date]
## Pricing Findings
| Severity | Finding | Where |
## Paywall Variants
| Variant | Active | Issues |
## Experiments
| Name | Status | Findings | Recommend |
## Feature Flags
- Dead flags: [list]
- Mismatched defaults: [list]
- Unowned flags: [list]
## Funnel
- Missing analytics events: [list]
- Server-side receipt validation: [present | MISSING]
## Recommendations
- [P0/P1/P2 with action]
## Verdict: BALANCED / IMBALANCE / BLOCKINGAsk before writing to production/balance/balance-check-[date].md.
Phase 8: Update State
Append to production/session-state/active.md:
## Balance Check — [date]
- P0 issues: [count]
- Dominant-variant flags: [count]
- Dead flags: [count]
- Verdict: [verdict]
- Report: [path]
- Next: [/create-stories for P0/P1, or proceed]Quality Gates / PASS-FAIL
- BALANCED — pricing is internally consistent, no unowned flags, no funnel events missing, server-side receipt validation present.
- IMBALANCE — non-blocking issues exist (dead flags, dominant variants not yet promoted).
- BLOCKING — pricing arithmetic errors, missing receipt validation, flag references that crash offline launch, or experiments with invalid allocations.
Examples
Example 1 — Pre-release pricing tweak: User reduces annual price below 8x monthly. Skill flags dominance: "Most users will find no reason to pick monthly. Confirm intent." User confirms — promotion strategy. Verdict: IMBALANCE (with note).
Example 2 — Dead experiment cleanup: Detects 3 paywall variants no longer referenced by any active experiment. User approves removal of variants and config simplification. Two follow-up stories filed.
Next Steps
- BLOCKING -> open stories via
/create-stories, fix before release. - IMBALANCE -> schedule cleanup in next sprint via
/sprint-plan. - BALANCED -> include verdict in
/launch-checklist.
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.

