agentleFS
striderZAstriderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios/.agents/skills/start/SKILL.md

start

Skill118 starsChanged 8 days agoMITView on GitHub

First-time onboarding — asks where you are, then guides you to the right workflow or to pre-workflow exploration. No assumptions.

130 other projects use a version of this, 10 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

17 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 12 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 117 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 12

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Before asking anything, silently gather context so you can tailor your guidance.

    line 21
  2. Very specific:

    Engine configured?: Read docs/framework/technical-preferences.md.

    line 24
  3. Very specific:

    Game concept exists?: Check for design/gdd/game-concept.md.

    line 25
  4. Very specific:

    Prototypes exist?: Check for subdirectories in prototypes/.

    line 27
  5. Very specific:

    Production artifacts?: Check for files in production/sprints/ or production/milestones/.

    line 29
  6. Distinctive:

    Wait for the user's selection.

    line 47
  7. Distinctive:

    Ask them to share their vague idea — even a few words is enough

    line 85
  8. Distinctive:

    Ask them to describe their concept in one sentence — genre and core mechanic.

    line 113
  9. Distinctive:

    Do NOT: ask about engine preferences, review modes, or any workflow-specific setup.

    line 183
  10. Very specific:

    Write production/stage.txt with value exploration so that /help and other skills know the project is in the exploration phase.

    line 185
  11. Very specific:

    For all other paths: Check if production/review-mode.txt already exists.

    line 195
  12. Very specific:

    If it exists: Read it and show the current mode — "Review mode is set to [current]." — then proceed to Phase 4.

    line 197
  13. Very specific:

    If it does not exist: Use question:

    line 199
  14. Very specific:

    Write the choice to production/review-mode.txt immediately after the user selects — no separate "May I write?" needed, as the write is a …

    line 207
  15. Very specific:

    Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.

    line 214
  16. Very specific:

    After presenting the recommended path, use question to ask the user which step they'd like to take first.

    line 220
  17. Very specific:

    When the user confirms their next step, respond with a single short line: "Type [skill command] to begin." Nothing else.

    line 231

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 117 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Guided Onboarding

This skill writes up to two files:

  • production/stage.txt — set to exploration when user picks Path E (pre-workflow exploration).
  • production/review-mode.txt — review mode config (set in Phase 3b, skipped for Path E).

This skill is the entry point for new users. It does NOT assume you have a game idea, an engine preference, or any prior experience. It asks first, then routes you to the right workflow.


Phase 1: Detect Project State

Before asking anything, silently gather context so you can tailor your guidance. Do NOT show these results unprompted — they inform your recommendations, not the conversation opener.

Check:

  • Engine configured? Read docs/framework/technical-preferences.md. If the Engine field contains [TO BE CONFIGURED], the engine is not set.
  • Game concept exists? Check for design/gdd/game-concept.md.
  • Source code exists? Glob for source files in src/ (*.gd, *.cs, *.cpp, *.h, *.rs, *.py, *.js, *.ts).
  • Prototypes exist? Check for subdirectories in prototypes/.
  • Design docs exist? Count markdown files in design/gdd/.
  • Production artifacts? Check for files in production/sprints/ or production/milestones/.

Store these findings internally to validate the user's self-assessment and tailor recommendations.


Phase 2: Ask Where the User Is

This is the first thing the user sees. Use question with these exact options so the user can click rather than type:

  • Prompt: "Welcome to OpenCode Game Studios! Before I suggest anything, I'd like to understand where you're starting from. Where are you at with your game idea right now?"
  • Options:
    • A) No idea yet — I don't have a game concept at all. I want to explore and figure out what to make.
    • B) Vague idea — I have a rough theme, feeling, or genre in mind (e.g., "something with space" or "a cozy farming game") but nothing concrete.
    • C) Clear concept — I know the core idea — genre, basic mechanics, maybe a pitch sentence — but haven't formalized it into documents yet.
    • D) Existing work — I already have design docs, prototypes, code, or significant planning done. I want to organize or continue the work.
    • E) Multiple ideas — I have 2-4 rough game ideas and want to prototype them quickly before committing to a specific workflow.

Wait for the user's selection. Do not proceed until they respond.


Phase 3: Route Based on Answer

If A: No idea yet

The user needs creative exploration before anything else.

  1. Acknowledge that starting from zero is completely fine
  2. Briefly explain what /concept-brainstorm does (guided ideation using professional frameworks — MDA, player psychology, verb-first design). Mention that it has two modes: /concept-brainstorm open for fully open exploration, or /concept-brainstorm [hint] if they have even a vague theme (e.g., "space", "cozy", "horror").
  3. Recommend running /concept-brainstorm open as the next step, but invite them to use a hint if something comes to mind
  4. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /concept-brainstorm open — discover your game concept
    • /setup-engine — configure the engine (brainstorm will recommend one)
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If B: Vague idea

  1. Ask them to share their vague idea — even a few words is enough
  2. Validate the idea as a starting point (don't judge or redirect)
  3. Recommend running /concept-brainstorm [their hint] to develop it
  4. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /concept-brainstorm [hint] — develop the idea into a full concept
    • /setup-engine — configure the engine
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If C: Clear concept

  1. Ask them to describe their concept in one sentence — genre and core mechanic. Use plain text, not question (it's an open response).
  2. Acknowledge the concept, then use question to offer two paths:
    • Prompt: "How would you like to proceed?"
    • Options:
      • Formalize it first — Run /concept-brainstorm [concept] to structure it into a proper game concept document
      • Jump straight in — Go to /setup-engine now and write the GDD manually afterward
  3. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /concept-brainstorm or /setup-engine — (their pick from step 2)
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (after brainstorm if run, or after concept doc exists)
    • /design-review — validate the concept doc
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into individual systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If D: Existing work

  1. Share what you found in Phase 1:
    • "I can see you have [X source files / Y design docs / Z prototypes]..."
    • "Your engine is [configured as X / not yet configured]..."
  2. Sub-case D1 — Early stage (engine not configured or only a game concept exists):

    • Recommend /setup-engine first if engine not configured
    • Then /project-stage-detect for a gap inventory

    Sub-case D2 — GDDs, ADRs, or stories already exist:

    • Explain: "Having files isn't the same as the template's skills being able to use them. GDDs might be missing required sections. /adopt checks this specifically."
    • Recommend:
      1. /project-stage-detect — understand what phase and what's missing entirely
      2. /adopt — audit whether existing artifacts are in the right internal format
  3. Show the recommended path for D2:
    • /project-stage-detect — phase detection + existence gaps
    • /adopt — format compliance audit + migration plan
    • /setup-engine — if engine not configured
    • /design-system retrofit [path] — fill missing GDD sections
    • /architecture-decision retrofit [path] — add missing ADR sections
    • /architecture-review — bootstrap the TR requirement registry
    • /gate-check — validate readiness for next phase

If E: Multiple ideas to explore

The user wants to explore several rough ideas before committing to a workflow.

  1. Acknowledge that prototyping before committing is a good approach
  2. Briefly explain what /explore does (pre-workflow rapid prototyping — build throwaway prototypes in prototypes/explore/, produces lightweight REPORT.md per idea, no workflow commitment, 1-2 days per idea)
  3. Recommend running /explore [idea-name] for their first idea, then more for subsequent ideas
  4. Show the recommended path:

    Pre-workflow exploration:

    • /explore idea-a — build a prototype for the first idea (1-2 days)
    • /explore idea-b — build a prototype for the second idea (1-2 days)
    • /explore idea-c — (optional) build a prototype for the third idea
    • Review reports in prototypes/explore/*/REPORT.md
    • /gate-check workflow-selection — compare results and choose Hybrid or Full OCGS
  5. Do NOT ask about engine preferences, review modes, or any workflow-specific setup. The user is in pre-workflow exploration.
  6. Write production/stage.txt with value exploration so that /help and other skills know the project is in the exploration phase. Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.

    This is the only file Path E writes. No production/review-mode.txt is created.


Phase 3b: Set Review Mode

If the user chose Path E (exploration): Skip this phase entirely. No review mode is needed for pre-workflow exploration. Proceed directly to Phase 4.

For all other paths: Check if production/review-mode.txt already exists.

If it exists: Read it and show the current mode — "Review mode is set to [current]." — then proceed to Phase 4. Do not ask again.

If it does not exist: Use question:

  • Prompt: "One setup choice: how much design review would you want as you work through the workflow?"
  • Options:
    • Full — Director specialists review at each key workflow step. Best for teams, learning the workflow, or when you want thorough feedback on every decision.
    • Lean (recommended) — Directors only at phase gate transitions (/gate-check). Skips per-skill reviews. Balanced approach for solo devs and small teams.
    • Solo — No director reviews at all. Maximum speed. Best for game jams, prototypes, or if the reviews feel like overhead.

Write the choice to production/review-mode.txt immediately after the user selects — no separate "May I write?" needed, as the write is a direct consequence of the selection:

  • Full → write full
  • Lean (recommended) → write lean
  • Solo → write solo

Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.


Phase 4: Confirm Before Proceeding

After presenting the recommended path, use question to ask the user which step they'd like to take first. Never auto-run the next skill.

  • Prompt: "Would you like to start with [recommended first step]?"
  • Options:
    • Yes, let's start with [recommended first step]
    • I'd like to do something else first

Phase 5: Hand Off

When the user confirms their next step, respond with a single short line: "Type [skill command] to begin." Nothing else. Do not re-explain the skill or add encouragement. The /start skill's job is done.

Verdict: COMPLETE — user oriented and handed off to next step.


Edge Cases

  • User picks D but project is empty: Gently redirect — "It looks like the project is a fresh template with no artifacts yet. Would Path A or B be a better fit?"
  • User picks A but project has code: Mention what you found — "I noticed there's already code in src/. Did you mean to pick D (existing work)?"
  • User is returning (engine configured, concept exists): Skip onboarding entirely — "It looks like you're already set up! Your engine is [X] and you have a game concept at design/gdd/game-concept.md. Review mode: [read from production/review-mode.txt, or 'lean (default)' if missing]. Want to pick up where you left off? Try /sprint-plan or just tell me what you'd like to work on."
  • User is returning with exploration stage (production/stage.txt reads exploration): Skip full onboarding — "It looks like you're exploring game ideas! You have [N] explore prototypes in prototypes/explore/. Want to run /explore [another-idea], or are you ready to run /gate-check workflow-selection to choose a workflow?"
  • User picks E but has existing project artifacts: Detect if production/stage.txt already has a non-exploration value. If so, warn: "It looks like you already have a project in the [phase] phase. Did you mean to continue that work (Path D) instead?"
  • User doesn't fit any option: Let them describe their situation in their own words and adapt.

Collaborative Protocol

  1. Ask first — never assume the user's state or intent
  2. Present options — give clear paths, not mandates
  3. User decides — they pick the direction
  4. No auto-execution — recommend the next skill, don't run it without asking
  5. Adapt — if the user's situation doesn't fit a template, listen and adjust

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.