When this skill is invoked:
- •
Read the target design document in full.
- •
Read the master CLAUDE.md to understand project context and standards.
- •
Read related design documents referenced or implied by the target doc (check
design/gdd/for related systems). - •
Evaluate against the Design Document Standard checklist:
- • Has Overview section (one-paragraph summary)
- • Has Player Fantasy section (intended feeling)
- • Has Detailed Rules section (unambiguous mechanics)
- • Has Formulas section (all math defined with variables)
- • Has Edge Cases section (unusual situations handled)
- • Has Dependencies section (other systems listed)
- • Has Tuning Knobs section (configurable values identified)
- • Has Acceptance Criteria section (testable success conditions)
- •
Check for internal consistency:
- •Do the formulas produce values that match the described behavior?
- •Do edge cases contradict the main rules?
- •Are dependencies bidirectional (does the other system know about this one)?
- •
Check for implementability:
- •Are the rules precise enough for a programmer to implement without guessing?
- •Are there any "hand-wave" sections where details are missing?
- •Are performance implications considered?
- •
Check for cross-system consistency:
- •Does this conflict with any existing mechanic?
- •Does this create unintended interactions with other systems?
- •Is this consistent with the game's established tone and pillars?
- •
Output the review in this format:
code
## Design Review: [Document Title] ### Completeness: [X/8 sections present] [List missing sections] ### Consistency Issues [List any internal or cross-system contradictions] ### Implementability Concerns [List any vague or unimplementable sections] ### Balance Concerns [List any obvious balance risks] ### Recommendations [Prioritized list of improvements] ### Verdict: [APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION NEEDED]