Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发执行命令github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

day-one-patch第一天补丁

Agent Skill

day-one-patch 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

474

周安装

19

GitHub Stars

16,597

下载量

154
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:day-one-patch(第一天补丁)
来源仓库:https://github.com/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios
仓库路径:skills/day-one-patch
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios --skill day-one-patch
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios --skill day-one-patch

简介

day-one-patch 规划游戏首发补丁的最小安全范围与轻量 QA 流程。

  • 聚焦于黄金母版锁定后的必要修复,避免大规模变更引发发布风险。
  • 包含回滚预案与认证反馈处理机制,确保上线过程可控。
  • 适用于 Steam、主机平台等需预审环境的发行场景,强调事前风险评估。
  • 执行前应冻结构建版本,并明确标识必须修复的关键缺陷清单。

SKILL.md

Day-One Patch

Every shipped game has a day-one patch. Planning it before launch day prevents chaos. This skill scopes the patch to only what is safe and necessary, gates it through a lightweight QA pass, and ensures a rollback plan exists before anything ships. It is a mini-sprint — not a hotfix, not a full sprint.

When to run:

  • After the gold master build is locked (cert approved or launch candidate tagged)
  • When known bugs exist that are too risky to address in the gold master
  • When cert feedback requires minor fixes post-submission
  • When a pre-launch playtest surfaces must-fix issues after the release gate passed

Day-one patch scope rules:

  • Only P1/P2 bugs that are SAFE to fix quickly
  • No new features — this is fix-only
  • No refactoring — minimum viable change
  • Any fix that requires more than 4 hours of dev time belongs in patch 1.1, not day-one

Output: production/releases/day-one-patch-[version].md


Phase 1: Load Release Context

Read:

  • production/stage.txt — confirm project is in Release stage
  • The most recent file in production/gate-checks/ — read the release gate verdict
  • production/qa/bugs/*.md — load all bugs with Status: Open or Fixed — Pending Verification
  • production/sprints/ most recent — understand what shipped
  • production/security/security-audit-*.md most recent — check for any open security items

If production/stage.txt is not Release or Polish:

"Day-one patch prep is for Release-stage projects. Current stage: [stage]. This skill is not appropriate until you are approaching launch."

Phase 2: Scope the Patch

Step 2a — Classify open bugs for patch inclusion

For each open bug, evaluate:

CriterionInclude in day-one?
S1 or S2 severityYes — must include if safe to fix
P1 priorityYes
Fix estimated < 4 hoursYes
Fix requires architecture changeNo — defer to 1.1
Fix introduces new code pathsNo — too risky
Fix is data/config only (no code change)Yes — very low risk
Cert feedback requirementYes — required for platform approval
S3/S4 severityOnly if trivial config fix; otherwise defer

Step 2b — Present patch scope to user

Use AskUserQuestion:

  • Prompt: "Based on open bugs and cert feedback, here is the proposed day-one patch scope. Does this look right?"
  • Show: table of included bugs (ID, severity, description, estimated effort)
  • Show: table of deferred bugs (ID, severity, reason deferred)
  • Options: [A] Approve this scope / [B] Adjust — I want to add or remove items / [C] No day-one patch needed

If [C]: output "No day-one patch required. Proceed to /launch-checklist." Stop.

Step 2c — Check total scope

Sum estimated effort. If total exceeds 1 day of work:

"⚠️ Patch scope is [N hours] — this exceeds a safe day-one window. Consider deferring lower-priority items to patch 1.1. A bloated day-one patch introduces more risk than it removes."

Use AskUserQuestion to confirm proceeding or reduce scope.


Phase 3: Rollback Plan

Before any code is written, define the rollback procedure. This is non-negotiable.

Spawn release-manager via Task. Ask them to produce a rollback plan covering:

  • How to revert to the gold master build on each target platform
  • Platform-specific rollback constraints (some platforms cannot roll back cert builds)
  • Who is responsible for triggering the rollback
  • What player communication is required if a rollback occurs

Present the rollback plan. Ask: "May I write this rollback plan to production/releases/rollback-plan-[version].md?"

Do not proceed to Phase 4 until the rollback plan is written.


Phase 4: Implement Fixes

For each bug in the approved scope, spawn a focused implementation loop:

  1. Spawn lead-programmer via Task with:

- The bug report (exact reproduction steps and root cause if known) - The constraint: minimum viable fix only, no cleanup - The affected files (from bug report Technical Context section)

  1. The lead-programmer implements and runs targeted tests.
  2. Spawn qa-tester via Task to verify: does the bug reproduce after the fix?

For config/data-only fixes: make the change directly (no programmer agent needed). Confirm the value changed and re-run any relevant smoke test.


Phase 5: Patch QA Gate

This is a lightweight QA pass — not a full /team-qa. The patch is already QA-approved from the release gate; we are only re-verifying the changed areas.

Spawn qa-lead via Task with:

  • List of all changed files
  • List of bugs fixed (with verification status from Phase 4)
  • The smoke check scope for the affected systems

Ask qa-lead to determine: Is a targeted smoke check sufficient, or do any fixes touch systems that require a broader regression?

Run the required QA scope:

  • Targeted smoke check — run /smoke-check [affected-systems]
  • Broader regression — run targeted tests in tests/unit/ and tests/integration/ for affected systems

QA verdict must be PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS before proceeding. If FAIL: scope the failing fix out of the day-one patch and defer to 1.1.


Phase 6: Generate Patch Record

# Day-One Patch: [Game Name] v[version]

**Date prepared**: [date]
**Target release**: [launch date or "day of launch"]
**Base build**: [gold master tag or commit]
**Patch build**: [patch tag or commit]

---

## Patch Notes (Internal)

### Bugs Fixed
| BUG-ID | Severity | Description | Fix summary |
|--------|----------|-------------|-------------|
| BUG-NNN | S[1-4] | [description] | [one-line fix] |

### Deferred to 1.1
| BUG-ID | Severity | Description | Reason deferred |
|--------|----------|-------------|-----------------|
| BUG-NNN | S[1-4] | [description] | [reason] |

---

## QA Sign-Off

**QA scope**: [Targeted smoke / Broader regression]
**Verdict**: [PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS]
**QA lead**: qa-lead agent
**Date**: [date]
**Warnings (if any)**: [list or "None"]

---

## Rollback Plan

See: `production/releases/rollback-plan-[version].md`

**Trigger condition**: If [N] or more S1 bugs are reported within [X] hours of launch, execute rollback.
**Rollback owner**: [user / producer]

---

## Approvals Required Before Deploy

- [ ] lead-programmer: all fixes reviewed
- [ ] qa-lead: QA gate PASS confirmed
- [ ] producer: deployment timing approved
- [ ] release-manager: platform submission confirmed

---

## Player-Facing Patch Notes

[Draft for community-manager to review before publishing]

[list player-facing changes in plain language]

Ask: "May I write this patch record to production/releases/day-one-patch-[version].md?"


Phase 7: Next Steps

After the patch record is written:

  1. Run /patch-notes to generate the player-facing version of the patch notes
  2. Run /bug-report verify [BUG-ID] for each fixed bug after the patch is live
  3. Run /bug-report close [BUG-ID] for each verified fix
  4. Schedule a post-launch review 48–72 hours after launch using /retrospective launch

If any S1 bugs remain open after the patch:

"⚠️ S1 bugs remain open and were not patched. These are accepted risks. Document them in the rollback plan trigger conditions — if they occur at scale, rollback may be preferable to a follow-up patch."

Collaborative Protocol

  • Scope discipline is everything — resist scope creep; every addition increases risk
  • Rollback plan first, always — a patch without a rollback plan is irresponsible
  • Deferred is not forgotten — every deferred bug gets a 1.1 ticket automatically
  • Player communication is part of the patch/patch-notes is a required output, not optional

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.34%
按下载量换算54

Claude

30.72%
按下载量换算47

Cursor

17.12%
按下载量换算26

Gemini CLI

10.29%
按下载量换算16

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/donchitos/claude-code-game-studios --skill day-one-patch 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills