Claude Code Game Studios is a setup that organizes Claude Code into a coordinated game-development team of specialized AI agents. It supports game projects across design, programming, art, audio, narrative, quality assurance, and production, with skills and workflows for coordinating that work.
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 Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill code-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Donchitos/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/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-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/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/code-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 7 Skill selects an external model or provider that may use a different account or billing plan than the operator expects. Undisclosed model switches can cause unexpected cost or quota consumption.Fix: Remove the model/provider override or disclose it prominently and require explicit operator approval before invoking an external coding CLI or billed model.
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 | $0.00020 | $0.03268 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.01307 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00654 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00327 |
Grade A, and why
code-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured today.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- code-review — 95% identical, 140 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 279 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys automation
Code Review
Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
automation_always_ask categories always prompt).
Insufficient input — check this before producing any report
If the inputs this skill needs do not exist, the answer is "could not run" — not a filled-in report. Check first, and stop if the check fails.
- List the inputs this skill reads (data files, prior reports, profiler output, test results, registries, source code).
- For each, record
FOUNDorABSENT— not "assumed present". - If any input required for a section is ABSENT, that section is
NOT ASSESSED — NO DATA. Do not estimate it, do not infer it from an adjacent artifact, and do not leave a mandated cell to be filled by whoever reads the template next. - If every required input is ABSENT, stop and report
NOT ASSESSED — NO DATAas the whole verdict, naming what was missing and which skill produces it.
A verdict of NOT ASSESSED is a success. It is the correct, useful answer to
"what does the data say?" when there is no data. The failure mode this prevents is
specific: a report whose verdict enum has no "could not run" state produces
false clean passes — an asset audit returning COMPLIANT on a project with no
assets and no standards, or a performance profile reporting ">99% headroom against
a 16.67ms budget" with zero profiler data and no budget ever set.
Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence. A scan that finds no matches because there are no files to scan has not verified anything. Say which of the two happened — a reader cannot tell from a green result.
Phase 1: Load Target Files
Read the target file(s) in full. Read CLAUDE.md for project coding standards.
Phase 2: Identify Engine Specialists
Read the specialists block from project.yaml; if it is absent, fall back to the ## Engine Specialists section of .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md. Note:
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.
- today Changed · -2 lines 3468d605b462
- 11d ago Changed · +1 lines e17b2caf4568
- 20d ago Changed · +25 lines a104c6122376
- 25d ago Changed b927833c3046
- 26d ago Changed · +69 lines · -21 tokens per session 0b6ba88b82dd
- 1mo ago First seen · 186 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A e0abfa89a0a2
code-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios (26,893 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 3,268 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
address-conductor-comment
A workflow for handling pending Conductor code-review comments, including reading their discussion and assigning changes to subagents when appropriate.
write-tour
A skill that writes a step-by-step tour of how code executes and saves it as tour.json for the Conductor code viewer.
explain-comment
A skill that reads a specified file or code range and adds explanatory comments in Japanese. The comments use a question style and focus on important logic, design choices, and side effects.
code-simplifier
Use when user asks to simplify, clean up, or refactor recently modified code for readability, consistency, or maintainability without changing behavior, especially after implementation and before broader review.
dare-review
Audita uma task DARE implementada — cruza a spec com o código real para detectar stubs, mocks fora de testes, funções vazias, TODOs e validar critério-a-critério se a implementação satisfaz o que a spec prometeu. Use antes de marcar uma task como DONE, ou quando o dev pedir revisão manual. Combina análise estática…
codex-cross-review
Use when the user wants Codex to review Claude's work, cross-validate PRs, or run high-volume PR review with dual-model verification using the codex-plugin-cc plugin.