map-systems — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited map-systems (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
When this skill is invoked:
Two modes:
/map-systems — Run the full decomposition workflow (Phases 1-5)to create or update the systems index.
/map-systems next — Pick the highest-priority undesigned systemfrom the index and hand off to /design-system (Phase 6).
Read the game concept and any existing design work. This provides the raw material for systems decomposition.
Required:
design/gdd/game-concept.md — fail with a clear message if missing:"No game concept found atdesign/gdd/game-concept.md. Run/brainstormfirst to create one, then come back to decompose it into systems."
Optional (read if they exist):
design/gdd/game-pillars.md — pillars constrain priority and scopedesign/gdd/systems-index.md — if exists, resume from where it left off(update, don't recreate from scratch)
design/gdd/*.md — check which system GDDs already existIf the systems index already exists:
AskUserQuestion to ask:"The systems index already exists with [N] systems ([M] designed, [K] not started). What would you like to do?"
"Review and revise priorities"
Extract and identify all systems the game needs. This is the creative core of the skill — it requires human judgment because concept docs rarely enumerate every system explicitly.
Scan the game concept for directly mentioned systems and mechanics:
For each explicit system, identify the hidden systems it implies. Games always need more systems than the concept doc mentions. Use this inference pattern:
inventory UI, item serialization for save/load
enemy AI, combat UI (health bars, damage numbers), death/respawn
point of interest tracking, world state persistence
anti-cheat, network UI (ping, player list)
success/failure mechanics, recipe discovery/learning
state management, localization hooks
tracking, progression UI, progression save data
Explain in conversation text why each implicit system is needed (with examples).
Present the enumeration organized by category. For each system, show:
Then use AskUserQuestion to capture feedback:
Iterate until the user approves the enumeration.
For each system, determine what it depends on. A system "depends on" another if it cannot function without that other system existing first.
For each system, list its dependencies. Use these dependency heuristics:
depends on it (but UI is designed after the gameplay system)
Arrange systems into layers:
Check for cycles in the dependency graph. If found:
cycle by defining a contract between the two systems)
Show the dependency map as a layered list. Highlight:
Use AskUserQuestion to ask: "Does this dependency ordering look right? Any dependencies I'm missing or that should be removed?"
Assign each system to a priority tier based on what milestone it's needed for.
Use these heuristics for initial assignment:
Foundation-layer dependencies
Present the priority assignments in a table. For each tier, explain why systems were placed there.
Use AskUserQuestion to ask: "Do these priority assignments match your vision? Which systems should be higher or lower priority?"
Explain reasoning in conversation: "I placed [system] in MVP because the core loop requires it — without [system], the 30-second loop can't function."
Combine dependency sort + priority tier to produce the final design order:
This is the order the team should write GDDs in.
Using the template at .claude/docs/templates/systems-index.md, populate the systems index with all data from Phases 2-4:
Present a summary of the document:
Ask: "May I write the systems index to design/gdd/systems-index.md?"
Wait for approval. Write the file only after "yes."
After writing, update production/session-state/active.md with:
This phase is entered when:
/map-systems [system-name]/map-systems nextnext was used, pick the highest-priority undesigned system (by design order)"Would you like to start designing individual systems now? The first system in the design order is [name]. Or would you prefer to stop here and come back later?"
Use AskUserQuestion for: "Start designing [system-name] now, pick a different system, or stop here?"
Once a system is selected, invoke the /design-system [system-name] skill.
The /design-system skill handles the full GDD authoring process:
/design-review when completeDo not duplicate the /design-system workflow here. This skill owns the systems index; /design-system owns individual system GDDs.
After /design-system completes, use AskUserQuestion:
If continuing, return to Step 6a.
After the systems index is created (or after designing some systems), suggest the appropriate next actions:
/design-system [system-name] to write the next system's GDD"/design-review [path] on each completed GDD to validate quality"/gate-check pre-production to check if you're ready to start building"/prototype [system]"/sprint-plan new"This skill follows the collaborative design principle at every phase:
/design-system/design-system, which handlesincremental section writing, cross-referencing, design review, and index updates
production/session-state/active.md aftereach milestone (index created, system designed, priorities changed)
Never auto-generate the full systems list and write it without review. Never start designing a system without user confirmation. Always show the enumeration, dependencies, and priorities for user validation.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.