Story Readiness

Port provenance: adapted from the pinned upstream source at 984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375f under MIT; see the repository parity ledger for the exact path and blob.

Story Readiness

This skill validates that a story file contains everything a developer needs to begin implementation — no mid-sprint design interruptions, no guessing, no ambiguous acceptance criteria. Run it before assigning a story.

This skill is read-only. It never edits story files. It reports findings and asks whether the user wants help filling gaps.

Output: Verdict per story (READY / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED) with a specific gap list for each non-ready story.

Phase 0: Resolve Review Mode

Resolve the review mode once at startup (store for all gate spawns this run):

1. If skill was called with --review [full|lean|solo] → use that value
2. Else read production/review-mode.txt → use that value
3. Else → default to lean

See the installed Codex role-gate protocol for the full check pattern and mode definitions.

1. Parse Arguments

Scope: the first invocation argument (blank = ask user via the available user-input mechanism)

• Specific path (e.g., $ai-game-studio:story-readiness production/epics/combat/story-001-basic-attack.md): validate that single story file.
• sprint: read the current sprint plan from production/sprints/ (most recent file), extract every story path it references, validate each one.
• all: glob production/epics/**/*.md, exclude EPIC.md index files, validate every story file found.
• No argument: ask the user which scope to validate.

If no argument is given, use the available user-input mechanism:

• "What would you like to validate?"
  • Options: "A specific story file", "All stories in the current sprint", "All stories in production/epics/", "Stories for a specific epic"

Report the scope before proceeding: "Validating [N] story files."

2. Load Supporting Context

Before checking any stories, load reference documents once (not per-story):

• design/gdd/systems-index.md — to know which systems have approved GDDs
• docs/architecture/control-manifest.md — to know which manifest rules exist (if the file does not exist, note it as missing once; do not re-flag per story) Also extract the Manifest Version: date from the header block if the file exists.
• docs/architecture/tr-registry.yaml — index all entries by id. Used to validate TR-IDs in stories. If the file does not exist, note it once; TR-ID checks will auto-pass for all stories (registry predates stories, so missing registry means stories are from before TR tracking was introduced).
• All ADR status fields — for each unique ADR referenced across the stories being checked, read the ADR file and note its Status: field. Cache these so you don't re-read the same ADR for every story.
• The current sprint file (if scope is sprint) — to identify Must Have / Should Have priority for escalation decisions

3. Story Readiness Checklist

For each story file, evaluate every item below. A story is READY only if all items pass or are explicitly marked N/A with a stated reason.

Design Completeness

• GDD requirement referenced: The story includes a design/gdd/ path and quotes or links a specific requirement, acceptance criterion, or rule from that GDD — not just the GDD filename. A link to the document without tracing to a specific requirement does not pass.
• Requirement is self-contained: The acceptance criteria in the story are understandable without opening the GDD. A developer should not need to read a separate document to understand what DONE means.
• Acceptance criteria are testable: Each criterion is a specific, observable condition — not "implement X" or "the system works correctly". Bad example: "Implement the jump mechanic." Good example: "Jump reaches max height of 5 units within 0.3 seconds when jump is held."
• No acceptance criteria require judgment calls (auto-pass for Type: Visual/Feel): Criteria like "feels responsive" or "looks good" are not testable without a defined benchmark. For Logic, Integration, UI, and Config/Data stories, these must be replaced with specific observable conditions. For Visual/Feel stories, subjective criteria are expected and this check auto-passes — instead verify that each subjective criterion has a paired playtest protocol or evidence requirement (e.g., "evidence doc required at production/qa/evidence/[slug]-evidence.md"). PASS if the acceptance criterion ends with or is accompanied by an explicit reference to a file path such as production/qa/evidence/[slug]-evidence.md. NEEDS WORK if the criterion is purely subjective with no evidence file path specified.

Architecture Completeness

• ADR referenced or N/A stated: The story references at least one ADR, OR explicitly states "No ADR applies" with a brief reason. A story with no ADR reference and no explicit N/A note fails this check.
• ADR is Accepted (not Proposed): For each referenced ADR, check its Status: field using the cached ADR statuses loaded in Section 2.
  • If Status: Accepted → pass.
  • If Status: Proposed → BLOCKED: the ADR may change before it is accepted, and the story's implementation guidance could be wrong. Fix: BLOCKED: ADR-NNNN is Proposed — wait for acceptance before implementing.
  • If the ADR file does not exist → BLOCKED: referenced ADR is missing.
  • Auto-pass if story has an explicit "No ADR applies" N/A note.
• TR-ID is valid and active: If the story contains a TR-[system]-NNN reference, look it up in the TR registry loaded in Section 2.
  • If the ID exists and status: active → pass.
  • If the ID exists and status: deprecated or status: superseded-by: ... → NEEDS WORK: the requirement was removed or replaced. Fix: update the story to reference the current requirement ID or remove if no longer applicable.
  • If the ID does not exist in the registry → NEEDS WORK: ID was not registered (story may predate registry, or registry needs an $ai-game-studio:architecture-review run).
  • Auto-pass if the story has no TR-ID reference OR if the registry does not exist.
• Manifest version is current: If the story has a Manifest Version: date in its header AND docs/architecture/control-manifest.md exists:
  • If story version matches current manifest Manifest Version: → pass.
  • If story version is older than current manifest → NEEDS WORK: new rules may apply. Fix: review changed manifest rules, update story if any forbidden/required entries changed, then update the story's Manifest Version: to current.
  • Auto-pass if either the story has no Manifest Version: field OR the manifest does not exist.
• Engine notes present: For any post-cutoff engine API this story is likely to touch, implementation notes or a verification requirement are included. If the story clearly does not touch engine APIs (e.g., it is a pure data/config change), "N/A — no engine API involved" is acceptable.
• Control manifest rules noted: Relevant layer rules from the control manifest are referenced, OR "N/A — manifest not yet created" is stated. This item auto-passes if docs/architecture/control-manifest.md does not exist yet (do not penalize stories written before the manifest was created).

Scope Clarity

• Estimate present: The story includes a size estimate (hours, points, or a t-shirt size). A story with no estimate cannot be planned.
• In-scope / Out-of-scope boundary stated: The story states what it does NOT include, either in an explicit Out of Scope section or in language that makes the boundary unambiguous. Without this, scope creep during implementation is likely.
• Story dependencies listed: If this story depends on other stories being DONE first, those story IDs are listed. If there are no dependencies, "None" is explicitly stated (not just omitted).

Open Questions

• No unresolved design questions: The story does not contain text flagged as "UNRESOLVED", "TBD", "TODO", "?", or equivalent markers in any acceptance criterion, implementation note, or rule statement.
• Dependency stories are not in DRAFT: For each story listed as a dependency, check if the file exists and does not have a DRAFT status. A story that depends on a DRAFT or missing story is BLOCKED, not just NEEDS WORK.

Asset References Check

• Referenced assets exist: Scan the story text for asset path patterns (paths containing assets/, or file extensions .png, .jpg, .svg, .wav, .ogg, .mp3, .glb, .gltf, .tres, .tscn, .res).
  • For each asset path found: use file discovery to check whether the file exists.
  • If any referenced asset does not exist: NEEDS WORK — note the missing path(s). (The story references assets that have not been created yet. Either remove the reference, create a placeholder, or mark it as an explicit dependency on an asset creation story.)
  • If all referenced assets exist: note "Referenced assets verified: [count] found."
  • If no asset paths are referenced in the story: note "No asset references found in story — skipping asset check." This item auto-passes.
  • This is an existence-only check. Do not validate file format or content.

Definition of Done

• Minimum testable acceptance criteria by story type:
  • Logic / Integration stories: at least 3
  • Visual/Feel and UI stories: at least 2
  • Config/Data stories: at least 1 Apply the threshold matching the story's Type: field. If the story has fewer than the minimum, mark as NEEDS WORK.
• Performance budget noted if applicable: If this story touches any part of the gameplay loop, rendering, or physics, a performance budget or a "no performance impact expected — [reason]" note is present.
• Story Type declared: The story includes a Type: field in its header identifying the test category (Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/Data). Without this, test evidence requirements cannot be enforced at story close. Fix: Add Type: [Logic|Integration|Visual/Feel|UI|Config/Data] to the story header.
• Test evidence requirement is clear: If the Story Type is set, the story includes a ## Test Evidence section stating where evidence will be stored (test file path for Logic/Integration, or evidence doc path for Visual/Feel/UI). Fix: Add ## Test Evidence with the expected evidence location for the story's type.

4. Verdict Assignment

Assign one of three verdicts per story:

READY — All checklist items pass or have explicit N/A justifications. The story can be assigned immediately.

NEEDS WORK — One or more checklist items fail, but all dependency stories exist and are not DRAFT. The story can be fixed before assignment.

BLOCKED — One or more dependency stories are missing or in DRAFT state, OR a critical design question (flagged UNRESOLVED in a criterion or rule) has no owner. The story cannot be assigned until the blocker is resolved. Note: a story that is BLOCKED may also have NEEDS WORK items — list both.

5. Output Format

Single story output

## Story Readiness: [story title]
File: [path]
Verdict: [READY / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED]

### Passing Checks (N/[total])
[list passing items briefly]

### Gaps
- [Checklist item]: [exact description of what is missing or wrong]
  Fix: [specific text needed to resolve this gap]

### Blockers (if BLOCKED)
- [What is blocking]: [story ID or design question that must resolve first]

Multiple story aggregate output

## Story Readiness Summary — [scope] — [date]

Ready:      [N] stories
Needs Work: [N] stories
Blocked:    [N] stories

### Ready Stories
- [story title] ([path])

### Needs Work
- [story title]: [primary gap — one line]
- [story title]: [primary gap — one line]

### Blocked Stories
- [story title]: Blocked by [story ID / design question]

---
[Full detail for each non-ready story follows, using the single-story format]

Sprint escalation

If the scope is sprint and any Must Have stories are NEEDS WORK or BLOCKED, add a prominent warning at the top of the output:

WARNING: [N] Must Have stories are not implementation-ready.
[List them with their primary gap or blocker.]
Resolve these before the sprint begins or replan with `$ai-game-studio:sprint-plan update`.

6. Collaborative Protocol

This skill is read-only. It never proposes edits or asks to write files.

After reporting findings, offer:

"Would you like help filling in the gaps for any of these stories? I can draft the missing sections for your approval."

If the user says yes for a specific story, draft only the missing sections in conversation. Do not use the available file-editing mechanism — the user (or $ai-game-studio:create-stories) handles writing.

Redirect rules:

• If a story file does not exist at all: "This story file is missing entirely. Run $ai-game-studio:create-epics [layer] then $ai-game-studio:create-stories [epic-slug] to generate stories from the GDD and ADR."
• If a story has no GDD reference and the work appears small: "This story has no GDD reference. If the change is small (under ~4 hours), run $ai-game-studio:quick-design [description] to create a Quick Design Spec, then reference that spec in the story."
• If a story's scope has grown beyond its original sizing: "This story appears to have expanded in scope. Consider splitting it or escalating to the producer before implementation begins."

7. Next-Story Handoff

After completing a single-story readiness check (not all or sprint scope):

1. Read the current sprint file from production/sprints/ (most recent).
2. Find stories that are:
   • Status: READY or NOT STARTED
   • Not the story just checked
   • Not blocked by incomplete dependencies
   • In the Must Have or Should Have tier

If any are found, surface up to 3:

### Other Ready Stories in This Sprint

1. [Story name] — [1-line description] — Est: [X hrs]
2. [Story name] — [1-line description] — Est: [X hrs]

Run `$ai-game-studio:story-readiness [path]` to validate before starting.

If no sprint file exists or no other ready stories are found, skip this section silently.

Phase 8: Director Gate — Story Readiness Review

Apply the review mode resolved in Phase 0 before spawning QL-STORY-READY:

• solo → skip. Note: "QL-STORY-READY skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to close.
• lean → skip. Note: "QL-STORY-READY skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to close.
• full → spawn as normal.

Spawn qa-lead with a Codex subagent using gate QL-STORY-READY (the installed Codex role-gate protocol).

Pass the following context:

• Story title
• Acceptance criteria list (all items from the story's acceptance criteria section)
• Dependency status (all dependencies listed and their current state: exist / DRAFT / missing)
• Overall verdict (READY / NEEDS WORK / BLOCKED) from Phase 4

Handle the verdict per standard rules in director-gates.md:

• ADEQUATE → story is cleared. Proceed to close.
• GAPS [list] → surface the specific gaps to the user via the available user-input mechanism: options: Update story with suggested gaps / Accept and proceed anyway / Discuss further.
• INADEQUATE → surface the specific gaps; ask user whether to update the story or proceed anyway.

Recommended Next Steps

• Run $ai-game-studio:dev-story [story-path] to begin implementation once the story is READY
• Run $ai-game-studio:story-readiness sprint to check all stories in the current sprint at once
• Run $ai-game-studio:create-stories [epic-slug] if a story file is missing entirely

Codex portability

Use the search, file-editing, shell, user-input, and subagent capabilities available in the active Codex surface. Use PowerShell syntax on Windows and POSIX syntax on macOS/Linux; do not require a Unix compatibility layer on Windows. Inherit the active model and permission mode, and do not weaken approval or sandbox boundaries.