start

Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · updated Apr 16, 2026

MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.

$npx skills add https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill start
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

### Start

  • description: "First-time onboarding — asks where you are, then guides you to the right workflow. No assumptions."
  • argument-hint: "[no arguments]"
  • allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, AskUserQuestion
skill.md
name
start
description
"First-time onboarding — asks where you are, then guides you to the right workflow. No assumptions."
argument-hint
"[no arguments]"
user-invocable
true
allowed-tools
Read, Glob, Grep, Write, AskUserQuestion

Guided Onboarding

This skill writes one file: production/review-mode.txt (review mode config set in Phase 3b).

This skill is the entry point for new users. It does NOT assume you have a game idea, an engine preference, or any prior experience. It asks first, then routes you to the right workflow.


Phase 1: Detect Project State

Before asking anything, silently gather context so you can tailor your guidance. Do NOT show these results unprompted — they inform your recommendations, not the conversation opener.

Check:

  • Engine configured? Read .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md. If the Engine field contains [TO BE CONFIGURED], the engine is not set.
  • Game concept exists? Check for design/gdd/game-concept.md.
  • Source code exists? Glob for source files in src/ (*.gd, *.cs, *.cpp, *.h, *.rs, *.py, *.js, *.ts).
  • Prototypes exist? Check for subdirectories in prototypes/.
  • Design docs exist? Count markdown files in design/gdd/.
  • Production artifacts? Check for files in production/sprints/ or production/milestones/.

Store these findings internally to validate the user's self-assessment and tailor recommendations.


Phase 2: Ask Where the User Is

This is the first thing the user sees. Use AskUserQuestion with these exact options so the user can click rather than type:

  • Prompt: "Welcome to Claude Code Game Studios! Before I suggest anything, I'd like to understand where you're starting from. Where are you at with your game idea right now?"
  • Options:
    • A) No idea yet — I don't have a game concept at all. I want to explore and figure out what to make.
    • B) Vague idea — I have a rough theme, feeling, or genre in mind (e.g., "something with space" or "a cozy farming game") but nothing concrete.
    • C) Clear concept — I know the core idea — genre, basic mechanics, maybe a pitch sentence — but haven't formalized it into documents yet.
    • D) Existing work — I already have design docs, prototypes, code, or significant planning done. I want to organize or continue the work.

Wait for the user's selection. Do not proceed until they respond.


Phase 3: Route Based on Answer

If A: No idea yet

The user needs creative exploration before anything else.

  1. Acknowledge that starting from zero is completely fine
  2. Briefly explain what /brainstorm does (guided ideation using professional frameworks — MDA, player psychology, verb-first design). Mention that it has two modes: /brainstorm open for fully open exploration, or /brainstorm [hint] if they have even a vague theme (e.g., "space", "cozy", "horror").
  3. Recommend running /brainstorm open as the next step, but invite them to use a hint if something comes to mind
  4. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /brainstorm open — discover your game concept
    • /setup-engine — configure the engine (brainstorm will recommend one)
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If B: Vague idea

  1. Ask them to share their vague idea — even a few words is enough
  2. Validate the idea as a starting point (don't judge or redirect)
  3. Recommend running /brainstorm [their hint] to develop it
  4. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /brainstorm [hint] — develop the idea into a full concept
    • /setup-engine — configure the engine
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (uses the Visual Identity Anchor brainstorm produces)
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If C: Clear concept

  1. Ask them to describe their concept in one sentence — genre and core mechanic. Use plain text, not AskUserQuestion (it's an open response).
  2. Acknowledge the concept, then use AskUserQuestion to offer two paths:
    • Prompt: "How would you like to proceed?"
    • Options:
      • Formalize it first — Run /brainstorm [concept] to structure it into a proper game concept document
      • Jump straight in — Go to /setup-engine now and write the GDD manually afterward
  3. Show the recommended path: Concept phase:
    • /brainstorm or /setup-engine — (their pick from step 2)
    • /art-bible — define visual identity (after brainstorm if run, or after concept doc exists)
    • /design-review — validate the concept doc
    • /map-systems — decompose the concept into individual systems
    • /design-system — author a GDD for each MVP system
    • /review-all-gdds — cross-system consistency check
    • /gate-check — validate readiness before architecture work Architecture phase:
    • /create-architecture — produce the master architecture blueprint and Required ADR list
    • /architecture-decision (×N) — record key technical decisions, following the Required ADR list
    • /create-control-manifest — compile decisions into an actionable rules sheet
    • /architecture-review — validate architecture coverage Pre-Production phase:
    • /ux-design — author UX specs for key screens (main menu, HUD, core interactions)
    • /prototype — build a throwaway prototype to validate the core mechanic
    • /playtest-report (×1+) — document each vertical slice playtest session
    • /create-epics — map systems to epics
    • /create-stories — break epics into implementable stories
    • /sprint-plan — plan the first sprint Production phase: → pick up stories with /dev-story

If D: Existing work

  1. Share what you found in Phase 1:

    • "I can see you have [X source files / Y design docs / Z prototypes]..."
    • "Your engine is [configured as X / not yet configured]..."
  2. Sub-case D1 — Early stage (engine not configured or only a game concept exists):

    • Recommend /setup-engine first if engine not configured
    • Then /project-stage-detect for a gap inventory

    Sub-case D2 — GDDs, ADRs, or stories already exist:

    • Explain: "Having files isn't the same as the template's skills being able to use them. GDDs might be missing required sections. /adopt checks this specifically."
    • Recommend:
      1. /project-stage-detect — understand what phase and what's missing entirely
      2. /adopt — audit whether existing artifacts are in the right internal format
  3. Show the recommended path for D2:

    • /project-stage-detect — phase detection + existence gaps
    • /adopt — format compliance audit + migration plan
    • /setup-engine — if engine not configured
    • /design-system retrofit [path] — fill missing GDD sections
    • /architecture-decision retrofit [path] — add missing ADR sections
    • /architecture-review — bootstrap the TR requirement registry
    • /gate-check — validate readiness for next phase

Phase 3b: Set Review Mode

Check if production/review-mode.txt already exists.

If it exists: Read it and show the current mode — "Review mode is set to [current]." — then proceed to Phase 4. Do not ask again.

If it does not exist: Use AskUserQuestion:

  • Prompt: "One setup choice: how much design review would you want as you work through the workflow?"
  • Options:
    • Full — Director specialists review at each key workflow step. Best for teams, learning the workflow, or when you want thorough feedback on every decision.
    • Lean (recommended) — Directors only at phase gate transitions (/gate-check). Skips per-skill reviews. Balanced approach for solo devs and small teams.
    • Solo — No director reviews at all. Maximum speed. Best for game jams, prototypes, or if the reviews feel like overhead.

Write the choice to production/review-mode.txt immediately after the user selects — no separate "May I write?" needed, as the write is a direct consequence of the selection:

  • Full → write full
  • Lean (recommended) → write lean
  • Solo → write solo

Create the production/ directory if it does not exist.


Phase 4: Confirm Before Proceeding

After presenting the recommended path, use AskUserQuestion to ask the user which step they'd like to take first. Never auto-run the next skill.

  • Prompt: "Would you like to start with [recommended first step]?"
  • Options:
    • Yes, let's start with [recommended first step]
    • I'd like to do something else first

Phase 5: Hand Off

When the user confirms their next step, respond with a single short line: "Type [skill command] to begin." Nothing else. Do not re-explain the skill or add encouragement. The /start skill's job is done.

Verdict: COMPLETE — user oriented and handed off to next step.


Edge Cases

  • User picks D but project is empty: Gently redirect — "It looks like the project is a fresh template with no artifacts yet. Would Path A or B be a better fit?"
  • User picks A but project has code: Mention what you found — "I noticed there's already code in src/. Did you mean to pick D (existing work)?"
  • User is returning (engine configured, concept exists): Skip onboarding entirely — "It looks like you're already set up! Your engine is [X] and you have a game concept at design/gdd/game-concept.md. Review mode: [read from production/review-mode.txt, or 'lean (default)' if missing]. Want to pick up where you left off? Try /sprint-plan or just tell me what you'd like to work on."
  • User doesn't fit any option: Let them describe their situation in their own words and adapt.

Collaborative Protocol

  1. Ask first — never assume the user's state or intent
  2. Present options — give clear paths, not mandates
  3. User decides — they pick the direction
  4. No auto-execution — recommend the next skill, don't run it without asking
  5. Adapt — if the user's situation doesn't fit a template, listen and adjust
how to use start

How to use start on Cursor

AI-first code editor with Composer

1

Prerequisites

Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:

  • Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
  • Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with node --version)
  • Active project directory or workspace where you want to add start
2

Execute installation command

Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:

$npx skills add https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill start

The skills CLI fetches start from GitHub repository Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios and configures it for Cursor.

3

Select Cursor when prompted

The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:

◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────
│ • Amp
│ • Antigravity
│ • Cline
│ • Codex
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ • Cursor
│ • Windsurf
4

Verify installation

Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:

.cursor/skills/start

Reload or restart Cursor to activate start. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /start) or your agent's skill management interface.

Security & Verification Notice

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 development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.

List & Monetize Your Skill

Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning

GET_STARTED →

Use Cases

Task Automation & Efficiency

Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort

Example

Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications

Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks

Knowledge Enhancement

Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance

Example

Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources

Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x

Quality Improvement

Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements

Example

Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors

Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort

Implementation Guide

Prerequisites

  • Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
  • Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
  • Willingness to iterate and refine outputs

Time Estimate

15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity

Installation Steps

  1. 1.Install skill using provided installation command
  2. 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
  3. 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
  4. 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
  5. 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable

Common Pitfalls

  • Expecting perfect results without iteration
  • Not providing enough context in prompts
  • Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
  • Accepting outputs without review and validation

Best Practices

✓ Do

  • +Start with clear, specific prompts
  • +Provide relevant context and constraints
  • +Review and refine all outputs before using
  • +Iterate to improve output quality
  • +Document successful prompt patterns

✗ Don't

  • Don't use without understanding skill limitations
  • Don't skip validation of outputs
  • Don't share sensitive information in prompts
  • Don't expect skill to replace human judgment

💡 Pro Tips

  • Be specific about desired format and style
  • Ask for multiple options to choose from
  • Request explanations to understand reasoning
  • Combine AI efficiency with human expertise

When to Use This

✓ 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.

Learning Path

  1. 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
  2. 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
  3. 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
  4. 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.865 reviews
  • Soo Ghosh· Dec 24, 2024

    start fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.

  • Ganesh Mohane· Dec 20, 2024

    Useful defaults in start — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.

  • Ama Park· Dec 20, 2024

    start has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Nikhil Rahman· Nov 15, 2024

    start has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Sakshi Patil· Nov 11, 2024

    start is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

  • Ama Gupta· Nov 11, 2024

    start fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.

  • Chinedu Torres· Oct 6, 2024

    Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: start is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.

  • Chaitanya Patil· Oct 2, 2024

    Keeps context tight: start is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Aarav Chawla· Oct 2, 2024

    We added start from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Nikhil Yang· Sep 25, 2024

    I recommend start for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

showing 1-10 of 65

1 / 7