* Godot Game Dev expansion pack for BMAD * Workflow changes * Workflow changes * Fixing config.yaml, editing README.md to indicate correct workflow * Fixing references to config.yaml, adding missing QA review to game-dev agent * More game story creation fixes * More game story creation fixes * Adding built web agent file * - Adding ability for QA agent to have preloaded context files similar to Dev agent. - Fixing stray Unity references in game-architecture-tmpl.yaml --------- Co-authored-by: Brian <bmadcode@gmail.com>
12 KiB
review-game-story
Perform a comprehensive Godot game story review with quality gate decision, focusing on TDD compliance, 60+ FPS performance validation, and GDScript/C# language strategy. This adaptive, risk-aware review creates both a story update and a detailed gate file.
Inputs
required:
- story_id: '{epic}.{story}' # e.g., "1.3"
- story_path: '{devStoryLocation}/{epic}.{story}.*.md' # Path from core-config.yaml
- story_title: '{title}' # If missing, derive from story file H1
- story_slug: '{slug}' # If missing, derive from title (lowercase, hyphenated)
Prerequisites
- Story status must be "Review"
- Developer has completed all tasks and updated the File List
- All GUT (GDScript) and GoDotTest (C#) tests are passing
- Performance profiler shows 60+ FPS maintained
- TDD cycle (Red-Green-Refactor) was followed
Review Process - Adaptive Test Architecture
1. Risk Assessment (Determines Review Depth)
Auto-escalate to deep review when:
- Performance drops below 60 FPS
- No TDD tests written (GUT/GoDotTest)
- Language strategy violated (wrong GDScript/C# choice)
- Object pooling missing for spawned entities
- Diff > 500 lines
- Previous gate was FAIL/CONCERNS
- Story has > 5 acceptance criteria
- Signal connections not properly cleaned up
2. Comprehensive Analysis
A. Requirements Traceability
- Map each acceptance criteria to GUT/GoDotTest tests
- Verify TDD was followed (tests written first)
- Identify coverage gaps (target 80% minimum)
- Verify all Godot nodes have corresponding test cases
- Check signal emission tests exist
B. Code Quality Review
- Node architecture and scene composition
- GDScript static typing enforcement (10-20% perf gain)
- C# optimization patterns (no LINQ, no allocations)
- Signal connection patterns
- Object pooling implementation
- Resource preloading vs lazy loading
- Godot best practices adherence
- Performance profiler validation (60+ FPS)
C. Test Architecture Assessment
- GUT test coverage for GDScript components
- GoDotTest coverage for C# components
- TDD compliance (Red-Green-Refactor cycle)
- Scene testing with test doubles
- Signal testing patterns
- Node mocking appropriateness
- Edge case and error scenario coverage
- Test execution performance impact
D. Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)
- Performance: 60+ FPS maintained, frame time <16.67ms
- Memory: Scene memory usage, object pooling
- Draw Calls: Within platform budgets
- Platform Compatibility: Export template validation
- Input Latency: <50ms for player controls
- Load Times: Scene transitions <3 seconds
- Reliability: Signal cleanup, node lifecycle
E. Godot Testability Evaluation
- Node Testability: Can nodes be tested in isolation?
- Signal Observability: Can signal emissions be verified?
- Scene Testing: Can scenes be tested without full game?
- Performance Testing: Can FPS be validated in tests?
- Platform Testing: Export templates testable?
F. Technical Debt Identification
- Missing TDD tests (GUT/GoDotTest)
- Dynamic typing in GDScript (performance debt)
- Missing object pools for spawned entities
- Unoptimized node trees
- Signal connection leaks
- Wrong language choice (GDScript vs C#)
- Performance bottlenecks below 60 FPS
3. Active Refactoring
- Add static typing to GDScript where missing
- Optimize C# code (remove LINQ, allocations)
- Implement object pooling for spawned entities
- Run GUT/GoDotTest to ensure changes don't break
- Profile to verify 60+ FPS maintained
- Document all changes in QA Results section
- Do NOT alter story content beyond QA Results section
- Do NOT change story Status or File List
4. Standards Compliance Check
- Verify adherence to Godot coding standards
- Check static typing in all GDScript
- Validate C# optimization patterns (no LINQ)
- Verify TDD approach (tests written first)
- Check node naming conventions
- Validate signal naming patterns
- Ensure 60+ FPS performance targets met
- Verify language strategy decisions
5. Acceptance Criteria Validation
- Verify each AC is fully implemented
- Check TDD tests exist for each AC
- Validate performance within 60+ FPS
- Verify object pooling where needed
- Check platform export compatibility
- Validate input handling across devices
6. Documentation and Comments
- Verify GDScript documentation comments
- Check C# XML documentation
- Ensure export variables have tooltips
- Document performance optimizations
- Note language choice rationale
- Document signal flow and connections
Output 1: Update Story File - QA Results Section ONLY
CRITICAL: You are ONLY authorized to update the "QA Results" section of the story file. DO NOT modify any other sections.
QA Results Anchor Rule:
- If
## QA Resultsdoesn't exist, append it at end of file - If it exists, append a new dated entry below existing entries
- Never edit other sections
After review and any refactoring, append your results to the story file in the QA Results section:
## QA Results
### Review Date: [Date]
### Reviewed By: Linus (Godot Game Test Architect)
### Code Quality Assessment
[Overall assessment of implementation quality]
### Refactoring Performed
[List any refactoring you performed with explanations]
- **File**: [filename]
- **Change**: [what was changed]
- **Why**: [reason for change]
- **How**: [how it improves the code]
### Compliance Check
- Godot Standards: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
- TDD Compliance: [✓/✗] [GUT/GoDotTest coverage]
- Performance (60+ FPS): [✓/✗] [profiler results]
- Language Strategy: [✓/✗] [GDScript/C# choices]
- Object Pooling: [✓/✗] [for spawned entities]
- All ACs Met: [✓/✗] [notes if any]
### Improvements Checklist
[Check off items you handled yourself, leave unchecked for dev to address]
- [x] Added static typing to player controller (scripts/player_controller.gd)
- [x] Implemented object pool for bullets (scripts/systems/bullet_pool.gd)
- [x] Added missing GUT tests for signal emissions
- [ ] Consider moving physics logic to C# for performance
- [ ] Add performance benchmarks to test suite
- [ ] Optimize draw calls in particle system
### Performance Review
- Frame Rate: [Current FPS] (Target: 60+)
- Frame Time: [ms] (Target: <16.67ms)
- Draw Calls: [count] (Budget: [platform specific])
- Memory Usage: [MB] (Limit: [platform specific])
- Object Pools: [Implemented/Missing]
### Language Strategy Review
- GDScript Components: [Appropriate/Should be C#]
- C# Components: [Appropriate/Should be GDScript]
- Static Typing: [Complete/Missing]
- Interop Boundaries: [Minimized/Excessive]
### Files Modified During Review
[If you modified files, list them here - ask Dev to update File List]
### Gate Status
Gate: {STATUS} → docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml
Risk profile: docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-risk-{YYYYMMDD}.md
NFR assessment: docs/qa/assessments/{epic}.{story}-nfr-{YYYYMMDD}.md
# Note: Paths should reference core-config.yaml for custom configurations
### Recommended Status
[✓ Ready for Done] / [✗ Changes Required - See unchecked items above]
(Story owner decides final status)
Output 2: Create Quality Gate File
Template and Directory:
- Render from
templates/qa-gate-tmpl.yaml - Create
docs/qa/gates/directory if missing (or configure in core-config.yaml) - Save to:
docs/qa/gates/{epic}.{story}-{slug}.yml
Gate file structure:
schema: 1
story: '{epic}.{story}'
story_title: '{story title}'
gate: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL|WAIVED
status_reason: '1-2 sentence explanation of gate decision'
reviewer: 'Linus (Godot Game Test Architect)'
updated: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}'
top_issues: [] # Empty if no issues
waiver: { active: false } # Set active: true only if WAIVED
# Extended fields (optional but recommended):
quality_score: 0-100 # 100 - (20*FAILs) - (10*CONCERNS) or use technical-preferences.md weights
expires: '{ISO-8601 timestamp}' # Typically 2 weeks from review
evidence:
tests_reviewed: { count }
risks_identified: { count }
trace:
ac_covered: [1, 2, 3] # AC numbers with test coverage
ac_gaps: [4] # AC numbers lacking coverage
nfr_validation:
performance:
status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
fps: '60+|<60'
frame_time: 'ms value'
notes: 'Profiler findings'
tdd_compliance:
status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
gut_coverage: 'percentage'
godottest_coverage: 'percentage'
notes: 'Test-first validation'
language_strategy:
status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
notes: 'GDScript/C# appropriateness'
reliability:
status: PASS|CONCERNS|FAIL
notes: 'Signal cleanup, node lifecycle'
recommendations:
immediate: # Must fix before production
- action: 'Fix FPS drops below 60'
refs: ['scenes/game.tscn']
- action: 'Add object pooling for particles'
refs: ['scripts/particle_spawner.gd']
future: # Can be addressed later
- action: 'Consider C# for physics system'
refs: ['scripts/physics_manager.gd']
Gate Decision Criteria
Deterministic rule (apply in order):
If risk_summary exists, apply its thresholds first (≥9 → FAIL, ≥6 → CONCERNS), then NFR statuses, then top_issues severity.
-
Risk thresholds (if risk_summary present):
- If any risk score ≥ 9 → Gate = FAIL (unless waived)
- Else if any score ≥ 6 → Gate = CONCERNS
-
Test coverage gaps (if trace available):
- If any P0 test from test-design is missing → Gate = CONCERNS
- If security/data-loss P0 test missing → Gate = FAIL
-
Issue severity:
- If any
top_issues.severity == high→ Gate = FAIL (unless waived) - Else if any
severity == medium→ Gate = CONCERNS
- If any
-
NFR statuses:
- If any NFR status is FAIL → Gate = FAIL
- Else if any NFR status is CONCERNS → Gate = CONCERNS
- Else → Gate = PASS
- WAIVED only when waiver.active: true with reason/approver
Detailed criteria:
- PASS: All critical requirements met, no blocking issues
- CONCERNS: Non-critical issues found, team should review
- FAIL: Critical issues that should be addressed
- WAIVED: Issues acknowledged but explicitly waived by team
Quality Score Calculation
quality_score = 100 - (20 × number of FAILs) - (10 × number of CONCERNS)
Bounded between 0 and 100
If technical-preferences.md defines custom weights, use those instead.
Suggested Owner Convention
For each issue in top_issues, include a suggested_owner:
dev: Code changes neededsm: Requirements clarification neededpo: Business decision needed
Key Principles
- You are a Godot Game Test Architect ensuring 60+ FPS and TDD compliance
- You enforce static typing in GDScript and optimization in C#
- You have authority to add object pooling and optimize performance
- Always validate with Godot profiler data
- Focus on performance-based prioritization
- Ensure GUT/GoDotTest coverage meets 80% target
- Provide actionable Godot-specific recommendations
Blocking Conditions
Stop the review and request clarification if:
- Performance drops below 60 FPS
- No TDD tests (GUT/GoDotTest) exist
- Story file is incomplete or missing critical sections
- File List is empty or clearly incomplete
- Language strategy violated without justification
- Object pooling missing for frequently spawned entities
- Critical node architecture issues that require discussion
Completion
After review:
- Update the QA Results section in the story file
- Create the gate file in
docs/qa/gates/ - Recommend status: "Ready for Done" or "Changes Required" (owner decides)
- If files were modified, list them in QA Results and ask Dev to update File List
- Always provide constructive feedback and actionable recommendations