Review an existing game codebase for architecture, performance, and best practices. Use when the user says "review my game", "code review", "check my game architecture", "is my game well structured", or "audit my game code". Do NOT use for making changes — this is read-only analysis. Use improve-gam

Performance Notes Take your time to do this thoroughly Quality is more important than speed Do not skip validation steps Review Game Analyze an existing game codebase and provide a structured review. This is the final step in the pipeline — it checks everything is wired up correctly and gives you a quality score. Instructions Analyze the game at $ARGUMENTS (or the current directory if no path given). Step 1: Identify the game Detect the engine (Three.js, Phaser, or other) Read package.json for dependencies and scripts Read the main entry point and index.html Identify the game concept/genre Step 2: Architecture Review Check for these required patterns and report compliance: [ ] EventBus : Is there a centralized event system? Are modules decoupled? [ ] GameState : Is there a centralized state singleton? [ ] Constants : Are config values centralized or scattered as magic numbers? [ ] Orchestrator : Is there a main Game class that initializes everything? [ ] Directory Structure : Is code organized into core/systems/gameplay/ui/level layers? [ ] Event Constants : Are events defined as named constants or raw strings? Step 3: Performance Review Check for common issues: [ ] Delta time capping : Is getDelta() capped to prevent death spirals? [ ] Object pooling : Are temp objects reused in hot loops? [ ] Resource disposal : Are Three.js geometries/materials/textures disposed? [ ] Event cleanup : Are event listeners cleaned up on scene transitions? [ ] Asset loading : Are assets preloaded with progress feedback? Step 4: Code Quality [ ] No circular dependencies : Modules flow one direction [ ] Single responsibility : Each module has one clear job [ ] Error handling : Event handlers wrapped in try/catch [ ] Consistent naming : Events use domain:action , files use PascalCase Step 5: Monetization Readiness [ ] Points system : Is there a scoring/points mechanism? [ ] Session tracking : Can game sessions be identified? [ ] Anti cheat potential : Is score validation server side or at least structured for it? [ ] Play.fun integration : Any existing SDK integration? Output Format Provide a structured report with: 1. Game Overview What the game is, tech stack, game loop 2. Architecture Score (out of 6 checks) 3. Performance Score (out of 5 checks) 4. Code Quality Score (out of 4 checks) 5. Monetization Readiness (out of 4 checks) 6. Top Recommendations Prioritized list of improvements with plain English explanations 7. What's Working Well Positive findings Example Usage Result: Architecture 6/6, Performance 4/5, Code Quality 4/4, Monetization 2/4 → Top recommendations: add Play.fun SDK, add object pooling for pipes, add delta time capping. Positive findings: clean EventBus usage, proper GameState reset, well organized directory structure. Next Step Tell the user: Your game has been through the full pipeline! Here's what you have: Scaffolded architecture ( /viral game ) Visual polish ( /design game ) Music and sound effects ( /add audio ) Automated tests ( /qa game ) Architecture review ( /review game ) (Reflects the /viral game one shot pipeline. If you're working through /make game , the equivalent state is "post scaffold phase + first development milestone shipped".) What's next? Add new gameplay features with /game creator:add feature [description] Deploy to the web — run npm run build && ~/.agents/skills/here now/scripts/publish.sh dist/ for instant hosting, or use GitHub Pages, Vercel, Netlify, itch.io Keep iterating! Run /design game , /add audio , or /review game again anytime after making changes.

review-game