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 scope-checkgit 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/scope-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/scope-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/scope-check/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/scope-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/scope-check.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 | $0.00030 | $0.01687 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00675 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00337 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
scope-check 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
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- scope-check — 100% identical, 60 lines differ
- scope-check — 100% identical, 59 lines differ
- scope-check — 97% identical, 61 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 166 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Scope Check
This skill is read-only — it reports findings but writes no files.
Compares original planned scope against current state to detect, quantify, and triage scope creep.
Argument: $ARGUMENTS — the whole string: a feature name (it may be several words), sprint number, or milestone name.
Phase 1: Find the Original Plan
Locate the baseline scope document for the given argument:
- Feature name → read
design/gdd/[feature].mdor matching file indesign/ - Sprint number (e.g.,
sprint-3) → readproduction/sprints/sprint-003.md(the name/sprint-planwrites) or similar - Milestone → read
production/milestones/[name].md
If the document is not found, report the missing file and stop. Do not proceed without
a baseline to compare against. Read a GDD by section: find the headings you need with
the Grep tool (pattern ^#, content mode) and Read those ranges with offset and
limit.
Phase 2: Read the Current State
Check what has actually been implemented or is in progress:
- Scan the codebase for files related to the feature/sprint
- Read git log for commits related to this work (
git log --oneline --since=[start-date]) - Check for TODO/FIXME comments that indicate unfinished scope additions
- Check active sprint plan if the feature is mid-sprint
Phase 3: Compare Original vs Current Scope
Produce the comparison report:
## Scope Check: [Feature/Sprint Name]
Generated: [Date]
### Original Scope
[List of items from the original plan]
### Current Scope
[List of items currently implemented or in progress]
> **If Phase 4 will return NOT ASSESSED, do not render the numeric block below.**
> Replace the counts and the Bloat Score with
> `[Baseline | Current state] unusable — see verdict` (whichever side could not
> be read) and give the reason. A rendered
> `Original items: 0 / Net scope change: 0%` one section above a NOT ASSESSED
> verdict re-creates the exact "0% reads as on track" hazard Phase 4 exists to
> kill, one phase earlier — and readers trust a number over a caveat.
### Scope Additions (not in original plan)
| Addition | Source | When | Justified? | Effort |
|----------|--------|------|------------|--------|
| [item] | [commit/person] | [date] | [Yes/No/Unclear] | [S/M/L] |
### Scope Removals (in original but dropped)
| Removed Item | Reason | Impact |
|-------------|--------|--------|
| [item] | [why removed] | [what's affected] |
### Bloat Score
- Original items: [N]
- Current items: [N]
- Items added: [N] (+[X]%)
- Items removed: [N]
- Net scope change: [+/-N] ([X]%)
### Risk Assessment
- **Schedule Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
- **Quality Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
- **Integration Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
### Recommendations
1. **Cut**: [Items that should be removed to stay on schedule]
2. **Defer**: [Items that can move to a future sprint/version]
3. **Keep**: [Additions that are genuinely necessary]
4. **Flag**: [Items that need a decision from producer/creative-director]
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 70af8cd29488
- 11d ago Changed ff1dd006e445
- 20d ago Changed · +5 lines e107c71689ae
- 26d ago Changed · +30 lines · -22 tokens per session 812de82531a5
- 1mo ago First seen · 129 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A f91150df11aa
scope-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios (26,893 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,687 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
work-log-claude
A work-log generator that reads Claude Code's local session records and produces an evidence-based Markdown report. It can organise work by project and time period while excluding unrelated session data.
dare-refine
Analisa complexidade de uma task DARE e, quando alta, quebra em sub-tasks menores. Use após gerar o DAG (para tasks HIGH/CRITICAL), quando o dev pedir refinamento manual, ou quando o escopo mudou e uma task ficou grande. Combina heurística determinística (CLI) com decisão semântica do agente.
dare-graph
Consulta e visualiza o grafo de conhecimento do projeto (tasks, arquivos, schemas, endpoints, componentes, entidades e suas relações). Mapeia o CLI dare graph.
dare-dag
Mostra o DAG estático de tasks (DARE/dare-dag.yaml): ranks, dependências e caminho crítico. Use dare dag viz para exportar o diagrama. Mapeia o CLI dare dag.
project-diagnosis
Structured gap analysis that identifies what a project is missing — not what's done poorly (that's /audit), but what's absent entirely. Checks for tests, CI, security basics, linting, type safety, deployment readiness, and dependency health. Each finding has a severity and a concrete fix action.
tech-debt-tracking
Track shortcuts with justifications, prevent debt accumulation, and surface outstanding debt at session start.