dev-story▌
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · updated Apr 16, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
### Dev Story
- ›description: "Read a story file and implement it. Loads the full context (story, GDD requirement, ADR guidelines, control manifest), routes to the right programmer agent for the system and engine, imp
- ›argument-hint: "[story-path]"
- ›allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion
| name | dev-story |
| description | "Read a story file and implement it. Loads the full context (story, GDD requirement, ADR guidelines, control manifest), routes to the right programmer agent for the system and engine, implements the code and test, and confirms each acceptance criterion. The core implementation skill — run after /story-readiness, before /code-review and /story-done." |
| argument-hint | "[story-path]" |
| user-invocable | true |
| allowed-tools | Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion |
Dev Story
This skill bridges planning and code. It reads a story file in full, assembles all the context a programmer needs, routes to the correct specialist agent, and drives implementation to completion — including writing the test.
The loop for every story:
/qa-plan sprint ← define test requirements before sprint begins
/story-readiness [path] ← validate before starting
/dev-story [path] ← implement it (this skill)
/code-review [files] ← review it
/story-done [path] ← verify and close it
After all sprint stories are done: run /team-qa sprint to execute the full QA cycle and get a sign-off verdict before advancing the project stage.
Output: Source code + test file in the project's src/ and tests/ directories.
Phase 1: Find the Story
If a path is provided: read that file directly.
If no argument: check production/session-state/active.md for the active
story. If found, confirm: "Continuing work on [story title] — is that correct?"
If not found, ask: "Which story are we implementing?" Glob
production/epics/**/*.md and list stories with Status: Ready.
Phase 2: Load Full Context
Before loading any context, verify required files exist. Extract the ADR path from the story's ADR Governing Implementation field, then check:
| File | Path | If missing |
|---|---|---|
| TR registry | docs/architecture/tr-registry.yaml | STOP — "TR registry not found. Run /create-epics to generate it." |
| Governing ADR | path from story's ADR field | STOP — "ADR file [path] not found. Run /architecture-decision to create it, or correct the filename in the story's ADR field." |
| Control manifest | docs/architecture/control-manifest.md | WARN and continue — "Control manifest not found — layer rules cannot be checked. Run /create-control-manifest." |
If the TR registry or governing ADR is missing, set the story status to BLOCKED in the session state and do not spawn any programmer agent.
Read all of the following simultaneously — these are independent reads. Do not start implementation until all context is loaded:
The story file
Extract and hold:
- Story title, ID, layer, type (Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/Data)
- TR-ID — the GDD requirement identifier
- Governing ADR reference
- Manifest Version embedded in story header
- Acceptance Criteria — every checkbox item, verbatim
- Implementation Notes — the ADR guidance section in the story
- Out of Scope boundaries
- Test Evidence — the required test file path
- Dependencies — what must be DONE before this story
The TR registry
Read docs/architecture/tr-registry.yaml. Look up the story's TR-ID.
Read the current requirement text — this is the source of truth for what the
GDD requires now. Do not rely on any inline text in the story file (may be stale).
The governing ADR
Read docs/architecture/[adr-file].md. Extract:
- The full Decision section
- The Implementation Guidelines section (this is what the programmer follows)
- The Engine Compatibility section (post-cutoff APIs, known risks)
- The ADR Dependencies section
The control manifest
Read docs/architecture/control-manifest.md. Extract the rules for this story's layer:
- Required patterns
- Forbidden patterns
- Performance guardrails
Check: does the story's embedded Manifest Version match the current manifest header date?
If they differ, use AskUserQuestion before proceeding:
- Prompt: "Story was written against manifest v[story-date]. Current manifest is v[current-date]. New rules may apply. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Update story manifest version and implement with current rules (Recommended)[B] Implement with old rules — I accept the risk of non-compliance[C] Stop here — I want to review the manifest diff first
If [A]: edit the story file's Manifest Version: field to the current manifest date before spawning the programmer. Then read the manifest carefully for new rules.
If [B]: read the manifest carefully for new rules anyway, and note the version mismatch in the Phase 6 summary under "Deviations".
If [C]: stop. Do not spawn any agent. Let the user review and re-run /dev-story.
Dependency validation
After extracting the Dependencies list from the story file, validate each:
- Glob
production/epics/**/*.mdto find each dependency story file. - Read its
Status:field. - If any dependency has Status other than
CompleteorDone:- Use
AskUserQuestion:- Prompt: "Story '[current story]' depends on '[dependency title]' which is currently [status], not Complete. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Proceed anyway — I accept the dependency risk[B] Stop — I'll complete the dependency first[C] The dependency is done but status wasn't updated — mark it Complete and continue
- If [B]: set story status to BLOCKED in session state and stop. Do not spawn any programmer agent.
- If [C]: ask "May I update [dependency path] Status to Complete?" before continuing.
- If [A]: note in Phase 6 summary under "Deviations": "Implemented with incomplete dependency: [dependency title] — [status]."
- Use
If a dependency file cannot be found: warn "Dependency story not found: [path]. Verify the path or create the story file."
Engine reference
Read .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md:
Engine:value — determines which programmer agents to use- Naming conventions (class names, file names, signal/event names)
- Performance budgets (frame budget, memory ceiling)
- Forbidden patterns
Phase 3: Route to the Right Programmer
Based on the story's Layer, Type, and system name, determine which specialist to spawn via Task.
Config/Data stories — skip agent spawning entirely:
If the story's Type is Config/Data, no programmer agent or engine specialist is needed. Jump directly to Phase 4 (Config/Data note). The implementation is a data file edit — no routing table evaluation, no engine specialist.
Primary agent routing table
| Story context | Primary agent |
|---|---|
| Foundation layer — any type | engine-programmer |
| Any layer — Type: UI | ui-programmer |
| Any layer — Type: Visual/Feel | gameplay-programmer (implements) |
| Core or Feature — gameplay mechanics | gameplay-programmer |
| Core or Feature — AI behaviour, pathfinding | ai-programmer |
| Core or Feature — networking, replication | network-programmer |
| Config/Data — no code | No agent needed (see Phase 4 Config note) |
Engine specialist — always spawn as secondary for code stories
Read the Engine Specialists section of .claude/docs/technical-preferences.md
to get the configured primary specialist. Spawn them alongside the primary agent
when the story involves engine-specific APIs, patterns, or the ADR has HIGH
engine risk.
| Engine | Specialist agents available |
|---|---|
| Godot 4 | godot-specialist, godot-gdscript-specialist, godot-shader-specialist |
| Unity | unity-specialist, unity-ui-specialist, unity-shader-specialist |
| Unreal Engine | unreal-specialist, ue-gas-specialist, ue-blueprint-specialist, ue-umg-specialist, ue-replication-specialist |
When engine risk is HIGH (from the ADR or VERSION.md): always spawn the engine specialist, even for non-engine-facing stories. High risk means the ADR records assumptions about post-cutoff engine APIs that need expert verification.
Phase 4: Implement
Spawn the chosen programmer agent(s) via Task with the full context package:
Provide the agent with:
- The complete story file content
- The current GDD requirement text (from TR registry)
- The ADR Decision + Implementation Guidelines (verbatim — do not summarise)
- The control manifest rules for this layer
- The engine naming conventions and performance budgets
- Any engine-specific notes from the ADR Engine Compatibility section
- The test file path that must be created
- Explicit instruction: implement this story and write the test
The agent should:
- Create or modify files in
src/following the ADR guidelines - Respect all Required and Forbidden patterns from the control manifest
- Stay within the story's Out of Scope boundaries (do not touch unrelated files)
- Write clean, doc-commented public APIs
Config/Data stories (no agent needed)
For Type: Config/Data stories, no programmer agent is required. The implementation is editing a data file. Read the story's acceptance criteria and make the specified changes to the data file directly. Note which values were changed and what they changed from/to.
Visual/Feel stories
Spawn gameplay-programmer to implement the code/animation calls. Note that
Visual/Feel acceptance criteria cannot be auto-verified — the "does it feel right?"
check happens in /story-done via manual confirmation.
Phase 5: Write the Test
For Logic and Integration stories, the test must be written as part of this implementation — not deferred to later.
Remind the programmer agent:
"The test file for this story is required at:
[path from Test Evidence section]. The story cannot be closed via/story-donewithout it. Write the test alongside the implementation, not after."
Test requirements (from coding-standards.md):
- File name:
[system]_[feature]_test.[ext] - Function names:
test_[scenario]_[expected_outcome] - Each acceptance criterion must have at least one test function covering it
- No random seeds, no time-dependent assertions, no external I/O
- Test the formula bounds from the GDD Formulas section
For Visual/Feel and UI stories: no automated test. Remind the agent to
note in the implementation summary what manual evidence will be needed:
"Evidence doc required at production/qa/evidence/[slug]-evidence.md."
For Config/Data stories: no test file. A smoke check will serve as evidence.
Phase 6: Collect and Summarise
After the programmer agent(s) complete, collect:
- Files created or modified (with paths)
- Test file created (path and number of test functions written)
- Any deviations from the story's Out of Scope boundary (flag these)
- Any questions or blockers the agent surfaced
- Any engine-specific risks the specialist flagged
Present a concise implementation summary:
## Implementation Complete: [Story Title]
**Files changed**:
- `src/[path]` — created / modified ([brief description])
- `tests/[path]` — test file ([N] test functions)
**Acceptance criteria covered**:
- [x] [criterion] — implemented in [file:function]
- [x] [criterion] — covered by test [test_name]
- [ ] [criterion] — DEFERRED: requires playtest (Visual/Feel)
**Deviations from scope**: [None] or [list files touched outside story boundary]
**Engine risks flagged**: [None] or [specialist finding]
**Blockers**: [None] or [describe]
Ready for: `/code-review [file1] [file2]` then `/story-done [story-path]`
Phase 7: Update Session State
Silently append to production/session-state/active.md:
## Session Extract — /dev-story [date]
- Story: [story-path] — [story title]
- Files changed: [comma-separated list]
- Test written: [path, or "None — Visual/Feel/Config story"]
- Blockers: [None, or description]
- Next: /code-review [files] then /story-done [story-path]
Create active.md if it does not exist. Confirm: "Session state updated."
Error Recovery Protocol
If any spawned agent (via Task) returns BLOCKED, errors, or cannot complete:
- Surface immediately: Report "[AgentName]: BLOCKED — [reason]" to the user before continuing to dependent phases
- Assess dependencies: Check whether the blocked agent's output is required by subsequent phases. If yes, do not proceed past that dependency point without user input.
- Offer options via AskUserQuestion with choices:
- Skip this agent and note the gap in the final report
- Retry with narrower scope
- Stop here and resolve the blocker first
- Always produce a partial report — output whatever was completed. Never discard work because one agent blocked.
Common blockers:
- Input file missing (story not found, GDD absent) → redirect to the skill that creates it
- ADR status is Proposed → do not implement; run
/architecture-decisionfirst - Scope too large → split into two stories via
/create-stories - Conflicting instructions between ADR and story → surface the conflict, do not guess
- Manifest version mismatch → show diff to user, ask whether to proceed with old rules or update story first
Collaborative Protocol
- File writes are delegated — all source code, test files, and evidence docs are written by sub-agents spawned via Task. Each sub-agent enforces the "May I write to [path]?" protocol individually. This orchestrator does not write files directly.
- Load before implementing — do not start coding until all context is loaded (story, TR-ID, ADR, manifest, engine prefs). Incomplete context produces code that drifts from design.
- The ADR is the law — implementation must follow the ADR's Implementation Guidelines. If the guidelines conflict with what seems "better," flag it in the summary rather than silently deviating.
- Stay in scope — the Out of Scope section is a contract. If implementing the story requires touching an out-of-scope file, stop and surface it: "Implementing [criterion] requires modifying [file], which is out of scope. Shall I proceed or create a separate story?"
- Test is not optional for Logic/Integration — do not mark implementation complete without the test file existing
- Visual/Feel criteria are deferred, not skipped — mark them as DEFERRED
in the summary; they will be manually verified in
/story-done - Ask before large structural decisions — if the story requires an architectural pattern not covered by the ADR, surface it before implementing: "The ADR doesn't specify how to handle [case]. My plan is [X]. Proceed?"
Recommended Next Steps
- Run
/code-review [file1] [file2]to review the implementation before closing the story - Run
/story-done [story-path]to verify acceptance criteria and mark the story complete - After all sprint stories are done: run
/team-qa sprintfor the full QA cycle before advancing the project stage
How to use dev-story 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 dev-story
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches dev-story 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 dev-story. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /dev-story) 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
4.5★★★★★37 reviews- ★★★★★Emma Singh· Dec 20, 2024
dev-story reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Alexander Srinivasan· Dec 8, 2024
dev-story fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Dhruvi Jain· Dec 4, 2024
I recommend dev-story for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Alexander White· Nov 27, 2024
We added dev-story from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Oshnikdeep· Nov 23, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: dev-story is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Zara Kim· Nov 11, 2024
dev-story has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Zara Wang· Oct 18, 2024
dev-story reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Ganesh Mohane· Oct 14, 2024
dev-story is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Zara Verma· Oct 2, 2024
dev-story fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Emma Srinivasan· Sep 25, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: dev-story is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 37