### Playtest Report
Works with
name: playtest-report
description: "Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis."
argument-hint: "[new|analyze path-to-notes] [--review full|lean|solo]"
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionplaytest-reportExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches playtest-report from Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate playtest-report. Access via /playtest-report in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
10.7K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
10.7K
stars
| name | playtest-report |
| description | "Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis." |
| argument-hint | "[new|analyze path-to-notes] [--review full|lean|solo]" |
| user-invocable | true |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Task, AskUserQuestion |
Resolve the review mode (once, store for all gate spawns this run):
--review [full|lean|solo] was passed → use thatproduction/review-mode.txt → use that valueleanSee .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern.
Determine the mode:
new → generate a blank playtest report templateanalyze [path] → read raw notes and fill in the template with structured findingsGenerate this template and output it to the user:
# Playtest Report
## Session Info
- **Date**: [Date]
- **Build**: [Version/Commit]
- **Duration**: [Time played]
- **Tester**: [Name/ID]
- **Platform**: [PC/Console/Mobile]
- **Input Method**: [KB+M / Gamepad / Touch]
- **Session Type**: [First time / Returning / Targeted test]
## Test Focus
[What specific features or flows were being tested]
## First Impressions (First 5 minutes)
- **Understood the goal?** [Yes/No/Partially]
- **Understood the controls?** [Yes/No/Partially]
- **Emotional response**: [Engaged/Confused/Bored/Frustrated/Excited]
- **Notes**: [Observations]
## Gameplay Flow
### What worked well
- [Observation 1]
### Pain points
- [Issue 1 -- Severity: High/Medium/Low]
### Confusion points
- [Where the player was confused and why]
### Moments of delight
- [What surprised or pleased the player]
## Bugs Encountered
| # | Description | Severity | Reproducible |
|---|-------------|----------|-------------|
## Feature-Specific Feedback
### [Feature 1]
- **Understood purpose?** [Yes/No]
- **Found engaging?** [Yes/No]
- **Suggestions**: [Tester suggestions]
## Quantitative Data (if available)
- **Deaths**: [Count and locations]
- **Time per area**: [Breakdown]
- **Items used**: [What and when]
- **Features discovered vs missed**: [List]
## Overall Assessment
- **Would play again?** [Yes/No/Maybe]
- **Difficulty**: [Too Easy / Just Right / Too Hard]
- **Pacing**: [Too Slow / Good / Too Fast]
- **Session length preference**: [Shorter / Good / Longer]
## Top 3 Priorities from this session
1. [Most important finding]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]
Read the raw notes at the provided path. Cross-reference with existing design documents. Fill in the template above with structured findings. Flag any playtest observations that conflict with design intent.
Categorize all findings into four buckets:
Present the categorized list, then route:
/propagate-design-change [path] on the affected design document to find downstream impacts before making changes."/balance-check [system] to verify the full balance picture before tuning values."/bug-report to formally track these."production/ when the team reaches that phase."Review mode check — apply before spawning CD-PLAYTEST:
solo → skip. Note: "CD-PLAYTEST skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to Phase 4 (save the report).lean → skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "CD-PLAYTEST skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to Phase 4 (save the report).full → spawn as normal.After categorising findings, spawn creative-director via Task using gate CD-PLAYTEST (.claude/docs/director-gates.md).
Pass: the structured report content, game pillars and core fantasy (from design/gdd/game-concept.md), the specific hypothesis being tested.
Present the creative director's assessment before saving the report. If CONCERNS or REJECT, add a ## Creative Director Assessment section to the report capturing the verdict and feedback. If APPROVE, note the approval in the report.
Ask: "May I write this playtest report to production/qa/playtests/playtest-[date]-[tester].md?"
If yes, write the file, creating the directory if needed.
Verdict: COMPLETE — playtest report generated.
/design-review on the updated GDD./bug-triage to update priorities.Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
JuliusBrussee/caveman
JuliusBrussee/caveman
whyashthakker/agent-skills-marketing
JuliusBrussee/caveman
whyashthakker/agent-skills-marketing
vercel-labs/skills
We added playtest-report from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: playtest-report is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
We added playtest-report from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: playtest-report is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
playtest-report fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
playtest-report has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: playtest-report is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
playtest-report has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
playtest-report is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Keeps context tight: playtest-report is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
showing 1-10 of 34