mirror of
https://github.com/merlinhu1/codex-game-studio.git
synced 2026-08-25 07:54:34 +02:00
f3365d2613
* docs: remove implemented OpenSpec change Remove the completed eval framework OpenSpec change documents and add a CCGS gap task reference based on the parity reports and upstream CCGS surfaces. * feat: generate CCGS gap report Add an OpenSpec-backed implementation for deterministic remaining-gap reporting from the CCGS parity matrix, including tests and regenerated references. * feat: deepen accessibility role parity Add OpenSpec-backed CCGS-depth coverage for the accessibility specialist role, including role contract tests, parity regression tests, and regenerated gap reports. * feat: close direct role depth gaps Add OpenSpec-backed CCGS-depth contracts for the remaining direct role package gaps, plus parity tests and regenerated remaining-gap reports. Stop before engine sub-specialist, workflow, template, and rule work. * feat: add engine sub-specialist roles Add OpenSpec-backed CCGS engine sub-specialist parity, selected-engine role sets, wrong-engine gating, focused engine references, generated custom-agent surfaces, tests, and regenerated parity reports. * feat: close first workflow parity batch * feat: close remaining workflow parity gaps * feat: close final CCGS parity gaps * chore: remove implemented OpenSpec changes --------- Co-authored-by: MerlinH <merlinh221@gmail.com>
28 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
28 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
# Technical Design Document
|
|
|
|
# Purpose
|
|
|
|
Technical design document scaffold for requirements, APIs, data flow, architecture, tests, and rollback.
|
|
|
|
Use this Codex-native template when a game-studio task needs a reviewable `technical-design-document` artifact. Keep claims tied to source files, playtest observations, engine output, or explicit user decisions.
|
|
|
|
# Inputs
|
|
|
|
- Project goal, current milestone, and active engine from `.codex/studio.json` or AGENTS.md.
|
|
- Relevant design, production, source, asset, or test files named by the task.
|
|
- Constraints, owners, risks, and required verification evidence.
|
|
|
|
# Outputs
|
|
|
|
- Summary: one paragraph naming the artifact, scope, and decision need.
|
|
- Source evidence: file paths, commands, observations, or user decisions used.
|
|
- Artifact body: structured sections appropriate for `technical-design-document` with assumptions labeled.
|
|
- Risks and follow-ups: blockers, unknowns, owner, and due milestone.
|
|
|
|
# Validation
|
|
|
|
- Confirm every required section has concrete content or an explicit `Not applicable` rationale.
|
|
- Check paths and commands are repo-relative and safe for the active engine.
|
|
- Include verification evidence such as tests, build output, playtest notes, review verdict, or handoff.
|
|
- Record unresolved assumptions separately from confirmed facts.
|