team-combat▌
Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios · updated Apr 16, 2026
### Team Combat
- ›description: "Orchestrate the combat team: coordinates game-designer, gameplay-programmer, ai-programmer, technical-artist, sound-designer, and qa-tester to design, implement, and validate a combat fe
- ›argument-hint: "[combat feature description]"
- ›allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Edit, Bash, Task, AskUserQuestion, TodoWrite
Argument check: If no combat feature description is provided, output:
"Usage:
/team-combat [combat feature description]— Provide a description of the combat feature to design and implement (e.g.,melee parry system,ranged weapon spread)." Then stop immediately without spawning any subagents or reading any files.
When this skill is invoked with a valid argument, orchestrate the combat team through a structured pipeline.
Decision Points: At each phase transition, use AskUserQuestion to present
the user with the subagent's proposals as selectable options. Write the agent's
full analysis in conversation, then capture the decision with concise labels.
The user must approve before moving to the next phase.
Team Composition
- game-designer — Design the mechanic, define formulas and edge cases
- gameplay-programmer — Implement the core gameplay code
- ai-programmer — Implement NPC/enemy AI behavior for the feature
- technical-artist — Create VFX, shader effects, and visual feedback
- sound-designer — Define audio events, impact sounds, and ambient combat audio
- engine specialist (primary) — Validate architecture and implementation patterns are idiomatic for the engine (read from
.claude/docs/technical-preferences.mdEngine Specialists section) - qa-tester — Write test cases and validate the implementation
How to Delegate
Use the Task tool to spawn each team member as a subagent:
subagent_type: game-designer— Design the mechanic, define formulas and edge casessubagent_type: gameplay-programmer— Implement the core gameplay codesubagent_type: ai-programmer— Implement NPC/enemy AI behaviorsubagent_type: technical-artist— Create VFX, shader effects, visual feedbacksubagent_type: sound-designer— Define audio events, impact sounds, ambient audiosubagent_type: [primary engine specialist]— Engine idiom validation for architecture and implementationsubagent_type: qa-tester— Write test cases and validate implementation
Always provide full context in each agent's prompt (design doc path, relevant code files, constraints). Launch independent agents in parallel where the pipeline allows it (e.g., Phase 3 agents can run simultaneously).
Pipeline
Phase 1: Design
Delegate to game-designer:
- Create or update the design document in
design/gdd/covering: mechanic overview, player fantasy, detailed rules, formulas with variable definitions, edge cases, dependencies, tuning knobs with safe ranges, and acceptance criteria - Output: completed design document
Phase 2: Architecture
Delegate to gameplay-programmer (with ai-programmer if AI is involved):
- Review the design document
- Design the code architecture: class structure, interfaces, data flow
- Identify integration points with existing systems
- Output: architecture sketch with file list and interface definitions
Then spawn the primary engine specialist to validate the proposed architecture:
- Is the class/node/component structure idiomatic for the pinned engine? (e.g., Godot node hierarchy, Unity MonoBehaviour vs DOTS, Unreal Actor/Component design)
- Are there engine-native systems that should be used instead of custom implementations?
- Any proposed APIs that are deprecated or changed in the pinned engine version?
- Output: engine architecture notes — incorporate into the architecture before Phase 3 begins
Phase 3: Implementation (parallel where possible)
Delegate in parallel:
- gameplay-programmer: Implement core combat mechanic code
- ai-programmer: Implement AI behaviors (if the feature involves NPC reactions)
- technical-artist: Create VFX and shader effects
- sound-designer: Define audio event list and mixing notes
Phase 4: Integration
- Wire together gameplay code, AI, VFX, and audio
- Ensure all tuning knobs are exposed and data-driven
- Verify the feature works with existing combat systems
Phase 5: Validation
Delegate to qa-tester:
- Write test cases from the acceptance criteria
- Test all edge cases documented in the design
- Verify performance impact is within budget
- File bug reports for any issues found
Phase 6: Sign-off
- Collect results from all team members
- Report feature status: COMPLETE / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED
- List any outstanding issues and their assigned owners
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
File Write Protocol
All file writes (design documents, implementation files, test cases) are delegated to sub-agents spawned via Task. Each sub-agent enforces the "May I write to [path]?" protocol. This orchestrator does not write files directly.
Output
A summary report covering: design completion status, implementation status per team member, test results, and any open issues.
Verdict: COMPLETE — combat feature designed, implemented, and validated. Verdict: BLOCKED — one or more phases could not complete; partial report produced with unresolved items listed.
Next Steps
- Run
/code-reviewon the implemented combat code before closing stories. - Run
/balance-checkto validate combat formulas and tuning values. - Run
/team-polishif VFX, audio, or performance polish is needed.
Ratings
4.5★★★★★32 reviews- ★★★★★Sakshi Patil· Nov 27, 2024
We added team-combat from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Oct 18, 2024
team-combat fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Henry Thompson· Sep 25, 2024
Useful defaults in team-combat — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Chinedu Ghosh· Sep 21, 2024
team-combat is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Sep 13, 2024
team-combat is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Chinedu Rao· Aug 16, 2024
I recommend team-combat for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Henry Garcia· Aug 12, 2024
Keeps context tight: team-combat is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Aug 4, 2024
Keeps context tight: team-combat is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Yash Thakker· Jul 23, 2024
Registry listing for team-combat matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Chinedu Bhatia· Jul 11, 2024
We added team-combat from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
showing 1-10 of 32