Roadmap Planner Skill
This skill reads a GDD and generates a sprint-based implementation roadmap organized around playable increments. Each sprint produces something the user can playtest, with work broken down per agent and structured through the Phase A/B/C/D flow.
The roadmap automatically scales based on the current lifecycle phase: fewer tighter sprints for prototypes, more expansive sprints for vertical slices and production.
Workflow Context
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Assigned Agent | design-lead |
| Sprint Phase | Phase 0 (pre-sprint design pipeline) |
| Directory Scope | docs/ |
| Workflow Reference | See docs/agent-team-workflow.md |
When to Use This Skill
Invoke this skill when the user:
- •Says "create roadmap" or "plan implementation"
- •Wants to break down a GDD into sprints
- •Says "what should I build first?"
- •Wants to see how work maps across the agent team
- •Asks for a prototype, vertical slice, or production roadmap
Lifecycle Detection
Before starting, read docs/.workflow-state.json to determine the current lifecycle phase.
{ "lifecycle_phase": "prototype" | "vertical_slice" | "production" }
If the file does not exist or the field is missing, ask the user. Default to prototype if unclear.
=== ROADMAP PLANNER === Lifecycle Phase: [PROTOTYPE / VERTICAL SLICE / PRODUCTION] Sprint Range: [1-4 / 3-6 / 6-12+] Focus: [Core loop testing / Polish + content expansion / Full game shipping] ===
Phase-Specific Behavior Summary
| Aspect | Prototype | Vertical Slice | Production |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sprint count | 1-4 | 3-6 | 6-12+ |
| Focus | Test core loop, riskiest mechanic first | Polish, content expansion, quality bar | All systems, all content, shipping |
| GDD input | docs/prototype-gdd.md | docs/vertical-slice-gdd.md | docs/production-gdd.md |
| Output file | docs/prototype-roadmap.md | docs/vertical-slice-roadmap.md | docs/production-roadmap.md |
| Lifecycle gate | Go / Pivot / Kill | Go to production / Iterate / Cancel | Alpha / Beta / Release gates |
| Sprint goal style | "Player can [test mechanic]" | "Player can [experience polished X]" | "Player can [use complete system]" |
Core Principle
Sprints are organized around playable increments, not systems.
- •Build toward "Player can X" — a sentence the user can verify by playing
- •Every sprint ends with a mandatory user review gate (Phase D)
- •Within each sprint, follow visible-first ordering
- •Agents work in parallel where possible, sequentially where dependencies require
Visible-First Ordering (Within Sprints)
1. Visual elements (sprites, scenes, UI) <- See it first 2. Player interaction (input, feedback) <- Feel it second 3. Core systems (logic, rules) <- Make it work 4. Data structures (resources, configs) <- Refine later 5. Polish (juice, effects) <- Last
Ordering rules:
- •Scenes before scripts — visual structure first, behavior second
- •Sprites before data — placeholder sprites immediately, stat Resources later
- •Hardcode before configure — hardcode values first, extract to data files later
- •Input before logic — player clicking/pressing first, game rules second
- •Feedback before polish — show something happened (even ugly), make it pretty later
Agent Directory Ownership
| Agent | Directories | What They Deliver |
|---|---|---|
| systems-dev | scripts/autoloads/, scripts/systems/, scripts/resources/ | Autoloads, managers, event buses, Resource classes |
| gameplay-dev | scripts/entities/, scripts/components/, scenes/gameplay/, scenes/levels/ | Player controller, enemies, combat, physics, levels |
| ui-dev | scripts/ui/, scenes/ui/, resources/themes/ | HUD, menus, popups, damage numbers, themes |
| content-architect | data/ (all subdirectories) | Character data, encounters, items, world data |
| asset-artist | assets/, music/, sfx/, voice/ | Sprites, tilesets, animations, music, SFX |
| design-lead | docs/features/, docs/ideas/ | Feature specs, idea briefs |
| qa-docs | docs/code-reviews/ | Code reviews, systems bible, changelog |
Follow directory ownership strictly when assigning tasks. When a deliverable spans multiple agents, split it into agent-scoped tasks.
Sprint Structure: Phase A/B/C/D
Every sprint follows this four-phase flow:
Phase A: Spec & Foundation |- design-lead writes/finalizes feature specs -> USER APPROVES |- systems-dev implements autoloads, managers, Resource classes |- asset-artist begins generating assets (parallel) Phase B: Implementation |- gameplay-dev implements entities, scenes, mechanics |- ui-dev implements HUD, menus, screens |- content-architect creates data files |- asset-artist continues (parallel) Phase C: QA & Documentation |- qa-docs reviews all code, updates systems bible + architecture doc + changelog |- developers fix critical issues from review |- design-lead pipelines specs for NEXT sprint (parallel) Phase D: User Review (ALL AGENTS PAUSED) |- User playtests the build |- User decides per feature: accept / request changes / reject |- User reviews proposed scope for next sprint |- Next sprint begins ONLY after user approval
Dependency Flow
design-lead (specs) -> systems-dev (APIs, Resources) -> gameplay-dev / ui-dev / content-architect -> qa-docs -> USER asset-artist runs in parallel throughout Phases A and B
The 5-Part Task Format
#### Task [Agent][Sprint].[Number]: [Clear Action Verb] [Specific Thing] **What:** One sentence — visible/testable outcome. **How:** 3-5 implementation steps. **Acceptance:** 2-4 checkbox criteria. **Files:** Files to create/modify (within agent's directories). **Hardcoded Values:** Magic numbers to use now (extract later).
Task size: 1-3 hours each. Too large = split it. Too small = combine it.
Detail by type: Visual tasks focus on appearance/position. Interaction tasks focus on input/feedback. System tasks focus on rules/API surface. Data tasks focus on shape/fields/examples.
Feature-to-Agent Mapping
| GDD Pattern | Agent | Directory |
|---|---|---|
| "manager", "autoload", "bus", "state machine", "Resource class" | systems-dev | scripts/autoloads/, scripts/systems/, scripts/resources/ |
| "player", "enemy", "entity", "combat", "physics", "level", "component" | gameplay-dev | scripts/entities/, scenes/gameplay/, scenes/levels/ |
| "HUD", "menu", "panel", "bar", "button", "screen", "theme" | ui-dev | scripts/ui/, scenes/ui/ |
| "enemy data", "item data", "encounter table", "quest", "dialogue" | content-architect | data/ |
| "sprite", "tileset", "animation", "music", "sound effect" | asset-artist | assets/, music/, sfx/ |
| "feature spec", "idea brief" | design-lead | docs/features/, docs/ideas/ |
| "code review", "systems bible", "changelog" | qa-docs | docs/code-reviews/ |
PROTOTYPE ROADMAP
Prototype Workflow
Step 1: Read Prototype GDD
Find docs/prototype-gdd.md. Extract: critical questions (Section 2), core mechanics (Section 3), content scope (Section 4), prototype scope (Section 5), implementation phases (Section 6), success metrics (Section 7), risks (Section 8).
Step 2: Identify Playable Increments
Decompose the core loop into sequential capabilities. Each capability = one sprint's "Player can X" goal.
Rules:
- •Each sprint produces something playable
- •Early sprints test the riskiest mechanic first
- •Later sprints integrate, add content, polish
- •Final sprint answers the GDD's critical questions
Step 3: Determine Sprint Count
| Scope | Sprints | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Single mechanic test | 1-2 | Build + polish |
| Core loop (2-3 mechanics) | 2-3 | One per mechanic + integration |
| Full prototype | 3-4 | Mechanics + content + polish |
Do not exceed 4 sprints for a prototype.
Step 4: Per-Agent Breakdown
For each sprint ask: What autoloads/managers (systems-dev)? What entities/scenes (gameplay-dev)? What UI (ui-dev)? What data (content-architect)? What assets (asset-artist)?
Prototype Lifecycle Gate
After all sprints: - [ ] User plays full prototype build - [ ] Critical questions scored 1-5 each - [ ] Decision: GO (vertical slice) / PIVOT (revise + retest) / KILL (abandon)
Save to: docs/prototype-roadmap.md
VERTICAL SLICE ROADMAP
Vertical Slice Workflow
Step 1: Read Vertical Slice GDD
Find docs/vertical-slice-gdd.md. Extract: prototype validation results, features being polished, new features, content expansion, quality bar definitions, technical requirements, development phases, success criteria.
Step 2: Identify Playable Increments
Vertical slice increments focus on polish and expansion:
- •Sprint 1: "Player can [experience refactored core loop with improved feel]"
- •Sprint 2: "Player can [use new features added since prototype]"
- •Sprint 3: "Player can [experience expanded content]"
- •Sprint 4: "Player can [hear and see the polished experience]"
- •Sprint 5: "Player can [play the balanced, complete slice]"
Rules:
- •Early sprints refactor and stabilize prototype codebase
- •Middle sprints add features and expand content
- •Later sprints focus on polish (art, audio, juice, VFX)
- •Final sprint is balance + bug fixing
- •Quality bar references guide every polish task
Step 3: Determine Sprint Count
| Scope | Sprints | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Light polish | 3 | Refactor + expand + polish |
| Standard slice | 4-5 | Refactor + features + content + polish + balance |
| Deep slice | 5-6 | Multiple content passes + extensive polish |
Step 4: Quality Bar Integration
For every polish task, reference the GDD's quality bar: name reference game, specify VFX/juice per interaction, list audio requirements, include performance targets as acceptance criteria.
Vertical Slice Lifecycle Gate
After all sprints: - [ ] User plays complete vertical slice - [ ] Validation questions scored (quality, engagement, repeatability, vision) - [ ] Quantitative targets assessed - [ ] Decision: GO (production) / ITERATE (fix + retest) / CANCEL
Save to: docs/vertical-slice-roadmap.md
PRODUCTION ROADMAP
Production Workflow
Step 1: Read Production GDD
Find docs/production-gdd.md. Extract: all game systems, progression/economy, content scope, player experience, narrative, art/audio direction, technical requirements, monetization, production plan, KPIs.
Step 2: Create Feature Inventory
Extract ALL features into a flat list. For each assign:
- •Type: Core System | Content | UI | Polish | Integration | Technical
- •Priority: Critical | High | Medium | Low
- •Effort: S (1-2 days) | M (3-5 days) | L (1-2 weeks) | XL (2+ weeks)
- •Dependencies: What must exist first
Step 3: Identify Playable Increments
Sprint 1-2: Core Foundation — "Player can [play basic core loop]" Sprint 3-4: Systems Completion — "Player can [use all major mechanics]" Sprint 5-6: Content Production — "Player can [experience all content]" Sprint 7-8: Progression & Balance — "Player can [progress through full game]" Sprint 9-10: Polish & Juice — "Player can [enjoy polished experience]" Sprint 11+: Testing & Ship — "Player can [play stable release build]"
Rules:
- •Core systems before content that uses them
- •Playable milestone at each sprint end
- •Polish after functionality works
- •Front-load uncertain/risky features
- •Each sprint still produces something evaluable
Step 4: Determine Sprint Count
| Scope | Sprints | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Small indie (1-3 months) | 6-8 | Foundation + systems + content + polish + ship |
| Medium indie (3-6 months) | 8-12 | More content passes, deeper polish |
| Large indie (6+ months) | 12+ | Full content pipeline, extensive testing |
Step 5: Enhanced Task Format
Production tasks add Type, Priority, Effort, Requirements, and Implementation Notes to the standard 5-part format.
Step 6: Asset Schedule & Risk Register
Asset Schedule: table with category, count, sprint needed, assigned agent. Risk Register: table with risk, impact, mitigation strategy, sprint affected.
Production Lifecycle Gates
Alpha (systems complete): - [ ] All gameplay systems functional - [ ] All content placeholder-complete - [ ] No critical bugs Beta (content complete): - [ ] All content final, all art/audio integrated - [ ] Performance targets met Release: - [ ] Zero critical bugs, minimal minor - [ ] Platform requirements met
Save to: docs/production-roadmap.md
ROADMAP OUTPUT STRUCTURE (ALL PHASES)
# [GAME TITLE] -- [Phase] Implementation Roadmap **Based On:** [Phase] GDD v[X.Y] | **Lifecycle:** [Phase] | **Sprints:** [N] **Target:** [Core question / quality proof / shipping goal] | **Created:** [Date] --- ## Quick Start Critical path to first playable: Sprint 1 delivers "[Player can X]" Key agents: [relevant agents] --- ## Sprint 1: "Player can [ACTION]" **Playable Increment:** [What user can do and test] **Acceptance Criteria:** - [ ] [Observable criterion 1] - [ ] [Observable criterion 2] ### Phase A: Spec & Foundation **Feature Specs (design-lead):** [spec file list] **Systems Work (systems-dev):** [tasks in 5-part format] **Assets Work (asset-artist):** [tasks in 5-part format] ### Phase B: Implementation **Gameplay Work (gameplay-dev):** [tasks with dependencies noted] **UI Work (ui-dev):** [tasks with dependencies noted] **Content Work (content-architect):** [tasks] ### Phase C: QA & Documentation qa-docs reviews all sprint code, updates bible/architecture/changelog ### Phase D: User Review **Playtest checklist:** [acceptance criteria user verifies by playing] **User decides:** per feature accept/changes/reject, next sprint scope approve/modify --- ## Sprint 2: "Player can [NEXT ACTION]" [Same structure] --- [Continue for all sprints] --- ## Lifecycle Gate: [Phase-Specific] [Gate criteria and decision framework] --- ## Risk Mitigation Per risk: risk, mitigation (assigned to sprint + agent), fallback ## Content & Asset Checklist Assets (asset-artist), Data (content-architect), Systems (systems-dev) — each with sprint assignment and file path
Quality Checklist
Sprint Structure:
- • Each sprint has a "Player can X" playable increment
- • Each sprint has Phase A/B/C/D breakdown
- • Each sprint ends with user review gate
- • Acceptance criteria are observable and testable
Per-Agent Breakdown:
- • Work assigned by directory ownership
- • Dependencies between agents marked explicitly
- • systems-dev in Phase A; gameplay-dev, ui-dev, content-architect in Phase B
Task Quality:
- • Tasks use 5-part format
- • Tasks follow visible-first ordering
- • File paths match agent directory ownership
Phase-Specific:
- •Prototype: 1-4 sprints, riskiest mechanic in Sprint 1, Go/Pivot/Kill gate
- •Vertical Slice: 3-6 sprints, quality bar refs in polish tasks, Go/Iterate/Cancel gate
- •Production: 6-12+ sprints, full feature inventory, asset schedule, Alpha/Beta/Release gates
Workflow Summary
- •Read
docs/.workflow-state.jsonto detect lifecycle phase - •Display phase header with sprint range and focus
- •Find and read the phase-appropriate GDD
- •Extract features, mechanics, content scope
- •Identify playable increments ("Player can X" milestones)
- •Determine sprint count based on phase guidelines
- •Break each increment into per-agent work by directory ownership
- •Map dependencies between agents within each sprint
- •Write full roadmap with Phase A/B/C/D per sprint
- •Add lifecycle gate, risks, asset checklist
- •Save to
docs/[phase]-roadmap.md
Integration with Other Skills
- •Reads From:
gdd-generator(input GDD for current phase) - •Feeds Into:
feature-spec-generator(Sprint 1 features need specs before Phase A) - •Works With:
changelog-updater,systems-bible-updater,version-control-helper,code-reviewer
Key Principles
DO: Organize around playable increments; per-agent work by directory ownership; Phase A/B/C/D every sprint; mandatory user review gates; visible-first ordering; explicit dependencies; 5-part task format; riskiest mechanic early; scale sprints to phase.
DO NOT: Organize by system layer; create day-by-day solo schedules; skip review gates; assign work outside agent directories; create non-playable sprints; make tasks too large or too small; ignore dependencies; add tasks not in GDD.
This skill transforms a GDD at any lifecycle phase into a sprint-based, agent-team roadmap where every sprint delivers a playable increment, work is distributed by directory ownership, and the user retains creative control through mandatory review gates.