Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill design-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-StudiosWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/coralgame/claude-code-game-studios/design-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/coralgame/claude-code-game-studios/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/coralgame/claude-code-game-studios/design-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/coralgame/claude-code-game-studios/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/coralgame/claude-code-game-studios/design-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00034 | $0.00715 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00358 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00143 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
design-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 10d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
92% identical to design-review — 2 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
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:
## 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]
- Contextual next step recommendations:
- If the document being reviewed is
game-concept.mdorgame-pillars.md:- Check if
design/gdd/systems-index.mdexists - If it does NOT exist, add to Recommendations:
"This concept is ready for systems decomposition. Run
/map-systemsto break it down into individual systems with dependencies and priorities, then write per-system GDDs."
- Check if
- If the document is an individual system GDD:
- Check if the systems index references this system
- If verdict is APPROVED: suggest "Update the systems index status for this system to 'Approved'."
- If verdict is NEEDS REVISION or MAJOR REVISION NEEDED: suggest "Update the systems index status for this system to 'In Review'."
- Note: This skill is read-only. The user (or
/design-system) must perform the actual status update in the systems index.
- If the document being reviewed is
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 10d ago First seen · 81 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 673f53d09356
design-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios (19 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 715 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to design-review, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
gameobject-component-destroy
Destroy one or more Components from a target GameObject. Missing (null) components are skipped — they cannot be destroyed. Use 'gameobject-find' and 'gameobject-component-get' to identify the components first.
unity-version-split
Split a C# file into Unity 6.5+ and pre-Unity 6.5 variants. Use when a file needs different implementations for different Unity versions due to API changes (e.g., EntityId vs int, GetEntityId vs GetInstanceID).
unity-addressables
Manage Addressables groups, entries, profiles and content builds (com.unity.addressables, reflection-based).
motion
How an agent turns a character mesh into a usable animated FBX — and how to judge whether the result is shippable.
playtest-report
Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis.
unity-manual-component
Manually add, configure, reorder, and copy components on GameObjects using Unity Editor UI. For one-off Inspector workflows that do not need REST automation.