Game Dev Improvement

skill-improve

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

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

### Skill Improve

  • description: "Improve a skill using a test-fix-retest loop. Runs static checks, proposes targeted fixes, rewrites the skill, re-tests, and keeps or reverts based on score change."
  • argument-hint: "[skill-name]"
  • allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Bash
skill.md

Skill Improve

Runs an improvement loop on a single skill: test → fix → retest → keep or revert.


Phase 1: Parse Argument

Read the skill name from the first argument. If missing, output usage and stop:

Usage: /skill-improve [skill-name]
Example: /skill-improve tech-debt

Verify .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md exists. If not, stop with: "Skill '[name]' not found."


Phase 2: Baseline Test

Run /skill-test static [name] and record the baseline score:

  • Count of FAILs
  • Count of WARNs
  • Which specific checks failed (Check 1–7)

Display to the user:

Static baseline:   [N] failures, [M] warnings
Failing: Check 4 (no ask-before-write), Check 5 (no handoff)

If baseline is 0 FAILs and 0 WARNs, note it and proceed to Phase 2b.

Phase 2b: Category Baseline

Look up the skill's category: field in CCGS Skill Testing Framework/catalog.yaml.

If no category: field is found, display: "Category: not yet assigned — skipping category checks." and skip to Phase 3.

If category is found, run /skill-test category [name] and record the category baseline:

  • Count of FAILs
  • Count of WARNs
  • Which specific category rubric metrics failed

Display to the user:

Category baseline: [N] failures, [M] warnings  ([category] rubric)

If BOTH static and category baselines are 0 FAILs and 0 WARNs, stop: "This skill already passes all static and category checks. No improvements needed."


Phase 3: Diagnose

Read the full skill file at .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md.

For each failing or warning static check, identify the exact gap:

  • Check 1 fail → which frontmatter field is missing
  • Check 2 fail → how many phases found vs. minimum required
  • Check 3 fail → no verdict keywords anywhere in the skill body
  • Check 4 fail → Write or Edit in allowed-tools but no ask-before-write language
  • Check 5 warn → no follow-up or next-step section at the end
  • Check 6 warncontext: fork set but fewer than 5 phases found
  • Check 7 warn → argument-hint is empty or doesn't match documented modes

For each failing or warning category check (if category was assigned in Phase 2b), identify the exact gap in the skill's text. For example:

  • If G2 fails (gate mode, full directors not spawned): skill body never references all 4 PHASE-GATE director prompts
  • If A2 fails (authoring, no per-section May-I-write): skill asks once at the end, not before each section write
  • If T3 fails (team, BLOCKED not surfaced): skill doesn't halt dependent work on blocked agent

Show the full combined diagnosis to the user before proposing any changes.


Phase 4: Propose Fix

Write a targeted fix for each failure and warning. Show the proposed changes as clearly marked before/after blocks. Only change what is failing — do not rewrite sections that are passing.

Ask: "May I write this improved version to .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md?"

If the user says no, stop here.


Phase 5: Write and Retest

Record the current content of the skill file (for revert if needed).

Write the improved skill to .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md.

Re-run /skill-test static [name] and record the new static score. If a category was assigned, also re-run /skill-test category [name] and record the new category score.

Display the comparison:

Static:   Before [N] failures, [M] warnings  →  After [N'] failures, [M'] warnings
Category: Before [N] failures, [M] warnings  →  After [N'] failures, [M'] warnings  (if applicable)
Combined change: improved / no change / worse

Phase 6: Verdict

Count the combined failure total: static FAILs + category FAILs + static WARNs + category WARNs.

If combined score improved (combined failure count is lower than baseline): Report: "Score improved. Changes kept." Show a summary of what was fixed in each dimension.

If combined score is the same or worse: Report: "Combined score did not improve." Show what changed and why it may not have helped. Ask: "May I revert .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md using git checkout?" If yes: run git checkout -- .claude/skills/[name]/SKILL.md


Phase 7: Next Steps

  • Run /skill-test static all to find the next skill with failures.
  • Run /skill-improve [next-name] to continue the loop on another skill.
  • Run /skill-test audit to see overall coverage progress.
general reviews

Ratings

4.868 reviews
  • Chinedu Mehta· Dec 24, 2024

    Registry listing for skill-improve matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

  • Naina Kim· Dec 20, 2024

    skill-improve reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Alexander Patel· Dec 16, 2024

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

  • Ishan Robinson· Dec 12, 2024

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

  • Chinedu Verma· Dec 8, 2024

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

  • Naina Choi· Dec 8, 2024

    skill-improve reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Chinedu Robinson· Nov 27, 2024

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

  • Neel Yang· Nov 27, 2024

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

  • Alexander Dixit· Nov 15, 2024

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

  • Li Chawla· Nov 11, 2024

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

showing 1-10 of 68

1 / 7