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 team-polishgit 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/team-polish)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/team-polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/team-polish/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/team-polish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios/team-polish.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 | $0.00038 | $0.04200 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.01680 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00840 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00420 |
Grade A, and why
team-polish 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 3d 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.
Copies of this mod
4 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- team-polish — 98% identical, 199 lines differ
- team-polish — 86% identical, 196 lines differ
- team-polish — 86% identical, 198 lines differ
- team-polish — 86% identical, 215 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 241 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Team Polish
If no argument is provided, output usage guidance and exit without spawning any agents:
Usage:
/team-polish [feature or area to polish] [--review full|lean|solo]— specify the feature or area to polish (e.g.,combat,main menu,inventory system,level-1). Do not useAskUserQuestionhere; output the guidance directly.
When this skill is invoked with an argument, orchestrate the polish team through a structured pipeline.
Decision Points: At each phase transition, use AskUserQuestion to present
the user with the subagent's proposals as selectable options. Write the agent's
full analysis in conversation, then capture the decision with concise labels.
In collaborative mode, the user must approve before moving to the next phase.
In guided mode the pipeline advances automatically unless a phase is BLOCKED;
in autonomous mode it runs end to end, recording each phase outcome via
log_decision. Decisions in automation_always_ask categories
(is_always_ask_category helper) always prompt regardless of mode. See
.claude/docs/automation-modes.md.
Phase 0: Resolve Config
!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,team.size,workflow
Resolved above — use as-is; --review overrides review_mode. No block →
defaults in .claude/docs/config-resolution.md.
review_mode sets director-gate depth, and this pipeline has no director gate:
no phase below spawns CD-, TD-, PR- or AD-PHASE-GATE, at any review_mode. Its
phase gates are the pipeline's own decision points (defined under team.size
below), and the agents that work at them are team members, not director gates.
automation drives the Decision Points note above. See the Decision Points note above and
.claude/docs/automation-modes.md for how each mode changes pipeline behavior.
team.size: which agents are active (orthogonal to review_mode gate-depth and workflow docs).
individual(default):performance-analyst+technical-artist. Other agents consulted via these two, not spawned separately. No programmer is active, so the optimisation list's programmer items are not implemented in this run — the report names the list as handed to/dev-story(Phase 2).small: +sound-designer+qa-tester+engine-programmer, andtools-programmerwhen Phase 1 traces a cause to a content authoring tool (the full pipeline as documented).studio: thesmallset,engine-programmerincluded, + an adversarial review pass: Phase 5's qa-tester is told "your job is not to confirm this holds — find how it breaks", and the report says the pass ran. This pipeline has no engine specialist to widen; engine-level work stays withengine-programmer. A non-core agent needed atindividualroutes through the nearest active core agent with an informational note. "Phase gate" means any phase that ends in anAskUserQuestiondecision point this pipeline itself lists — a transition under Decision Points above, or a Gate step written into the pipeline below — whatever theautomationmode.guidedandautonomouschange how a gate is passed (it auto-advances, or is recorded withlog_decision), not whether it is one, so bounded-exception condition (3) below holds at it in every mode. An agent restricted to "phase gates only" is spawned at those points and no others. This active-set scoping applies throughout the pipeline below: any phase that names an agent outside the active set routes through the nearest core agent rather than spawning it.
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.
- 3d ago Changed 8d394fd7111b
- 14d ago Changed c9c63c97c432
- 23d ago Changed · +27 lines d2bea963ed90
- 28d ago Changed 24ffbb6bf6a1
- 29d ago Changed · +73 lines · -7 tokens per session f68c46236916
- 1mo ago First seen · 141 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A fb4d48c5bd8f
team-polish is a skill published in the GitHub repository Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios (27,186 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 4,200 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
game-qa
Verify a game with evidence on its selected target runtime. Launch the actual build and prove real rendering, input, the core loop, at least one designed outcome, restart, and explicit limitations without dressing subjective fun up as a certain verdict. Use for test a generated game, QA a game build, check whether the…
flame-harness-evaluator
Phase 6 — skeptical QA. Run the game, watch it, then judge against the contract. Default = functional check; --strict adds quality and edge-case passes.
unity-testing
Use when writing or structuring tests — EditMode vs PlayMode test decisions, test architecture, what to test in Unity, mocking strategies, and CI integration for Unity tests.
game-design
How game development works as a process — roles, subtasks, workflows and role descriptions, especially (but not only) for Roblox. Use this skill when it's about the ORGANIZATION of game dev rather than concrete code: Which roles exist (Creative Director, Engineer, Artist, Polish/Audio, Business, QA-Tester, Game…
rbx-dev
Meta-skill for complete Roblox game development with Rojo — the entry point that knows and unifies the three specialist skills /rojo (filesystem→Studio sync, project setup), /rbx-studio (editor, MCP, assets, malware scan) and /game-design (roles, workflows, GDD). Use this skill for ANY Roblox game-dev undertaking…
unity-tests-write
Use when writing Unity tests, including EditMode tests, PlayMode tests, performance testing, and code coverage.