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 RamonBedin/mcp-game-deck --skill design-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RamonBedin/mcp-game-deckWrote 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/ramonbedin/mcp-game-deck/design-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ramonbedin/mcp-game-deck/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ramonbedin/mcp-game-deck/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/ramonbedin/mcp-game-deck/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ramonbedin/mcp-game-deck/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 | $0.00023 | $0.00348 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00174 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00070 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00035 |
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 11d 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.
What it actually says
When this skill is invoked:
-
Read the design document in full.
-
Check completeness (all sections present):
- Overview / summary
- Player experience goal
- Detailed mechanics/rules
- Formulas (if numeric system)
- Edge cases handled
- Dependencies on other systems
- Tuning knobs identified
- Acceptance criteria
-
Check consistency:
- No contradictions within the document
- Numbers add up (economy flows, damage ranges)
- References to other systems are accurate
-
Check implementability with our stack:
- Can this be built with Unity 6 + URP?
- Which MCP tools would be needed?
- ScriptableObject data model feasible?
- Performance implications clear?
-
Output:
## Design Review: [Document Name]
### Completeness: [X/8 sections present]
[Missing sections listed]
### Consistency: [CONSISTENT / ISSUES FOUND]
[Contradictions or gaps]
### Implementability: [CLEAR / CONCERNS]
[Technical feasibility with our Unity stack]
### Balance Risks
[Obvious balance concerns]
### Verdict: [APPROVED / NEEDS REVISION / MAJOR REVISION]
### Action Items
1. ...
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 55 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 66a08436c374
design-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository RamonBedin/mcp-game-deck (6 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 348 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
animation-review
Reviews Godot Animation implementation for known pitfalls. Triggers AFTER implementation, when code involves AnimationPlayer, AnimationTree, AnimatedSprite2D, SpriteFrames, AnimationNodeStateMachine, BlendSpace, OneShot, callbackmodeprocess, or animation playback control (play/travel/start). Do NOT use this skill for…
tilemap-review
Reviews Godot TileMap implementation for known pitfalls. Triggers AFTER implementation, when code involves TileMapLayer, TileSet, TileSetAtlasSource, TileSetScenesCollectionSource, terrain painting, setcell, erasecell, getcelltiledata, collision polygons on tiles, or NavigationRegion2D with tile-based navigation. Do…
godot-code-review
Use when reviewing GDScript or C# Godot code — checklist of best practices, common anti-patterns, and Godot-specific pitfalls.
hz-unity-code-review
Reviews Unity code targeting Meta Quest and Horizon OS for performance issues, rendering best practices, and common VR pitfalls. Use during code review or when diagnosing Quest performance problems in Unity projects.
unity-reviewer
Use when reviewing Unity C# code changes — checks for runtime-breaking bugs, performance anti-patterns, and maintainability issues. Provides severity-tiered review organized as Critical, Performance, and Style.
design-lenses
Structured game-design critique: review a game through Schell's design lenses, Wright's systems-and-emergence lenses, and the MDA framework, producing severity-ranked findings with concrete fixes. Use when the user asks 'is my game fun?', 'review my game design', 'why is it boring?', 'critique this game', 'what's…