day-one-patch▌
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · updated Apr 16, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
### Day One Patch
- ›description: "Prepare a day-one patch for a game launch. Scopes, prioritises, implements, and QA-gates a focused patch addressing known issues discovered after gold master but before or immediately af
- ›argument-hint: "[scope: known-bugs | cert-feedback | all]"
- ›allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion
| name | day-one-patch |
| description | "Prepare a day-one patch for a game launch. Scopes, prioritises, implements, and QA-gates a focused patch addressing known issues discovered after gold master but before or immediately after public launch. Treats the patch as a mini-sprint with its own QA gate and rollback plan." |
| argument-hint | "[scope: known-bugs | cert-feedback | all]" |
| user-invocable | true |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion |
Day-One Patch
Every shipped game has a day-one patch. Planning it before launch day prevents chaos. This skill scopes the patch to only what is safe and necessary, gates it through a lightweight QA pass, and ensures a rollback plan exists before anything ships. It is a mini-sprint — not a hotfix, not a full sprint.
When to run:
- After the gold master build is locked (cert approved or launch candidate tagged)
- When known bugs exist that are too risky to address in the gold master
- When cert feedback requires minor fixes post-submission
- When a pre-launch playtest surfaces must-fix issues after the release gate passed
Day-one patch scope rules:
- Only P1/P2 bugs that are SAFE to fix quickly
- No new features — this is fix-only
- No refactoring — minimum viable change
- Any fix that requires more than 4 hours of dev time belongs in patch 1.1, not day-one
Output: production/releases/day-one-patch-[version].md
Phase 1: Load Release Context
Read:
production/stage.txt— confirm project is in Release stage- The most recent file in
production/gate-checks/— read the release gate verdict production/qa/bugs/*.md— load all bugs with Status: Open or Fixed — Pending Verificationproduction/sprints/most recent — understand what shippedproduction/security/security-audit-*.mdmost recent — check for any open security items
If production/stage.txt is not Release or Polish:
"Day-one patch prep is for Release-stage projects. Current stage: [stage]. This skill is not appropriate until you are approaching launch."
Phase 2: Scope the Patch
Step 2a — Classify open bugs for patch inclusion
For each open bug, evaluate:
| Criterion | Include in day-one? |
|---|---|
| S1 or S2 severity | Yes — must include if safe to fix |
| P1 priority | Yes |
| Fix estimated < 4 hours | Yes |
| Fix requires architecture change | No — defer to 1.1 |
| Fix introduces new code paths | No — too risky |
| Fix is data/config only (no code change) | Yes — very low risk |
| Cert feedback requirement | Yes — required for platform approval |
| S3/S4 severity | Only if trivial config fix; otherwise defer |
Step 2b — Present patch scope to user
Use AskUserQuestion:
- Prompt: "Based on open bugs and cert feedback, here is the proposed day-one patch scope. Does this look right?"
- Show: table of included bugs (ID, severity, description, estimated effort)
- Show: table of deferred bugs (ID, severity, reason deferred)
- Options:
[A] Approve this scope/[B] Adjust — I want to add or remove items/[C] No day-one patch needed
If [C]: output "No day-one patch required. Proceed to /launch-checklist." Stop.
Step 2c — Check total scope
Sum estimated effort. If total exceeds 1 day of work:
"⚠️ Patch scope is [N hours] — this exceeds a safe day-one window. Consider deferring lower-priority items to patch 1.1. A bloated day-one patch introduces more risk than it removes."
Use AskUserQuestion to confirm proceeding or reduce scope.
Phase 3: Rollback Plan
Before any code is written, define the rollback procedure. This is non-negotiable.
Spawn release-manager via Task. Ask them to produce a rollback plan covering:
- How to revert to the gold master build on each target platform
- Platform-specific rollback constraints (some platforms cannot roll back cert builds)
- Who is responsible for triggering the rollback
- What player communication is required if a rollback occurs
Present the rollback plan. Ask: "May I write this rollback plan to production/releases/rollback-plan-[version].md?"
Do not proceed to Phase 4 until the rollback plan is written.
Phase 4: Implement Fixes
For each bug in the approved scope, spawn a focused implementation loop:
-
Spawn
lead-programmervia Task with:- The bug report (exact reproduction steps and root cause if known)
- The constraint: minimum viable fix only, no cleanup
- The affected files (from bug report Technical Context section)
-
The lead-programmer implements and runs targeted tests.
-
Spawn
qa-testervia Task to verify: does the bug reproduce after the fix?
For config/data-only fixes: make the change directly (no programmer agent needed). Confirm the value changed and re-run any relevant smoke test.
Phase 5: Patch QA Gate
This is a lightweight QA pass — not a full /team-qa. The patch is already QA-approved from the release gate; we are only re-verifying the changed areas.
Spawn qa-lead via Task with:
- List of all changed files
- List of bugs fixed (with verification status from Phase 4)
- The smoke check scope for the affected systems
Ask qa-lead to determine: Is a targeted smoke check sufficient, or do any fixes touch systems that require a broader regression?
Run the required QA scope:
- Targeted smoke check — run
/smoke-check [affected-systems] - Broader regression — run targeted tests in
tests/unit/andtests/integration/for affected systems
QA verdict must be PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS before proceeding. If FAIL: scope the failing fix out of the day-one patch and defer to 1.1.
Phase 6: Generate Patch Record
# Day-One Patch: [Game Name] v[version]
**Date prepared**: [date]
**Target release**: [launch date or "day of launch"]
**Base build**: [gold master tag or commit]
**Patch build**: [patch tag or commit]
---
## Patch Notes (Internal)
### Bugs Fixed
| BUG-ID | Severity | Description | Fix summary |
|--------|----------|-------------|-------------|
| BUG-NNN | S[1-4] | [description] | [one-line fix] |
### Deferred to 1.1
| BUG-ID | Severity | Description | Reason deferred |
|--------|----------|-------------|-----------------|
| BUG-NNN | S[1-4] | [description] | [reason] |
---
## QA Sign-Off
**QA scope**: [Targeted smoke / Broader regression]
**Verdict**: [PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS]
**QA lead**: qa-lead agent
**Date**: [date]
**Warnings (if any)**: [list or "None"]
---
## Rollback Plan
See: `production/releases/rollback-plan-[version].md`
**Trigger condition**: If [N] or more S1 bugs are reported within [X] hours of launch, execute rollback.
**Rollback owner**: [user / producer]
---
## Approvals Required Before Deploy
- [ ] lead-programmer: all fixes reviewed
- [ ] qa-lead: QA gate PASS confirmed
- [ ] producer: deployment timing approved
- [ ] release-manager: platform submission confirmed
---
## Player-Facing Patch Notes
[Draft for community-manager to review before publishing]
[list player-facing changes in plain language]
Ask: "May I write this patch record to production/releases/day-one-patch-[version].md?"
Phase 7: Next Steps
After the patch record is written:
- Run
/patch-notesto generate the player-facing version of the patch notes - Run
/bug-report verify [BUG-ID]for each fixed bug after the patch is live - Run
/bug-report close [BUG-ID]for each verified fix - Schedule a post-launch review 48–72 hours after launch using
/retrospective launch
If any S1 bugs remain open after the patch:
"⚠️ S1 bugs remain open and were not patched. These are accepted risks. Document them in the rollback plan trigger conditions — if they occur at scale, rollback may be preferable to a follow-up patch."
Collaborative Protocol
- Scope discipline is everything — resist scope creep; every addition increases risk
- Rollback plan first, always — a patch without a rollback plan is irresponsible
- Deferred is not forgotten — every deferred bug gets a 1.1 ticket automatically
- Player communication is part of the patch —
/patch-notesis a required output, not optional
How to use day-one-patch on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
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 day-one-patch
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches day-one-patch from GitHub repository Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate day-one-patch. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /day-one-patch) 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
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.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 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▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.8★★★★★36 reviews- ★★★★★Kwame Zhang· Dec 28, 2024
Useful defaults in day-one-patch — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Dec 16, 2024
day-one-patch has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Valentina Thomas· Dec 8, 2024
Keeps context tight: day-one-patch is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Soo Zhang· Nov 27, 2024
day-one-patch is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Sakura Garcia· Nov 23, 2024
day-one-patch reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Ava Park· Nov 19, 2024
We added day-one-patch from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Nov 7, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: day-one-patch is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Oct 26, 2024
We added day-one-patch from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Valentina Perez· Oct 18, 2024
day-one-patch fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Ama Huang· Oct 14, 2024
I recommend day-one-patch for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 36