Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit(游戏设计目标密度和即时性审核)

用于辅助界面设计、视觉规范、排版、配色、布局和交互体验优化。它适合让 Agent 根据产品场景整理页面结构、生成 UI 方案、检查视觉一致性或改进组件层级。使用时需要结合现有品牌、设计系统和用户任务,不应只堆装饰元素;涉及真实页面改动时,应通过截图或浏览器预览检查文本溢出、对齐和响应式表现。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为权限未标注;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 30,533。

总安装 2,864周安装 117GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 917核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit(游戏设计目标密度和即时性审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/stanestane/game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit
安装命令:
openclaw skills install game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 评估短期目标设置密度与反馈及时性。预防目标稀释或过载导致的注意力分散与成就感缺失。提供安全停止机制建议保障玩家自主控制权。内置多种游戏类型模板适配不同节奏偏好人群。必须结合 A/B 测试数据验证调整后的效果提升幅度。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    权限没有明确标注,第一次使用时只给一个无关紧要的任务,观察它到底读了哪些文件和网络。

常见问题

6 条

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别没有明确标注。第一次使用时建议只给无关紧要的任务,观察它实际读写了哪些内容。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,864 次,近一周安装 117 次,下载 917 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit

游戏设计目标密度和即时性审核 · 本页

2,864—权限未标注MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
game-design-goal-density-and-immediacy-audit
description
Audit a game, feature, progression loop, return-player experience, metagame layer, or session structure for density of goals, immediacy of goals, safe stopping points, and return triggers. Use when evaluating whether players can quickly find something meaningful to do, whether the game offers enough short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals, whether session lengths are flexible enough for real player schedules, or why a game feels aimless, overwhelming, or unable to fit into fragmented playtime.

Game Design Goal Density and Immediacy Audit

Audit a design by asking whether players can quickly find a meaningful goal, pursue it within the time they have, and leave the session feeling both satisfied and pulled to return.

Use this skill to evaluate how a game structures player time. Focus on the density of available goals, how immediate those goals feel, how they ladder across time horizons, whether players can end a session safely, and what return triggers bring them back.

Core principle

A strong session structure does not depend on one perfect goal. It gives the player enough meaningful goals of different sizes and time horizons that they can pick one that fits the time, energy, and attention they currently have.

What to produce

Generate:

  1. Audit target - what is being reviewed and what kind of session pattern it supports
  2. Goal density audit - how many meaningful goals are available at once and how varied they are
  3. Goal immediacy audit - how quickly the player can identify something worth doing now
  4. Time-horizon breakdown - short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals
  5. Session closure audit - whether the player can leave at a safe, satisfying moment
  6. Return-trigger audit - what unfinished business pulls the player back
  7. Recommendations - what to add, remove, clarify, pace, or restructure

Process

1. Define the audit target

Clarify:

  • what system, feature, or game is being audited
  • what kind of session pattern it expects: short bursts, long sessions, mixed sessions
  • whether the design is FTUE, return-player experience, core loop, metagame, or elder game
  • what player context matters most

2. Audit goal immediacy

Ask:

  • When the player opens the game, how quickly can they identify a meaningful thing to do?
  • Does the game help the returning player select a new goal?
  • Is the most important current opportunity visible enough?
  • Does the game over-rely on the player remembering what they were doing last session?
  • Is the player choosing a goal, or wandering through UI trying to figure out what matters?

Look for:

  • visible session entry points
  • clear next-step candidates
  • strong current priorities
  • low friction between logging in and acting
  • support for self-directed goal choice

3. Audit goal density

Ask:

  • How many meaningful goals are available at a given moment?
  • Do goals vary in size, difficulty, and time requirement?
  • Can different players find different goals that fit different amounts of available time?
  • Is the game sparse and aimless, or overcrowded and noisy?
  • Does the metagame provide enough context to make multiple goals feel meaningful?

Look for:

  • multiple simultaneous goal candidates
  • different effort bands
  • different reward horizons
  • overlap between core goals and meta goals
  • enough choice without drowning the player

4. Break down goals by time horizon

Evaluate whether the design offers a healthy spread of goals across these horizons:

Short-term goals

Goals that can usually be started and often completed in one brief session. Examples:

  • one level
  • one race
  • one mission
  • claim and spend loop
  • craft one needed item
  • collect one reward tier

Ask:

  • Are there enough goals that fit tiny pockets of time?
  • Can a player feel accomplished in a short session?
  • Are short-term goals meaningful, or merely mechanical chores?
Mid-term goals

Goals that take several sessions or a moderate amount of focused play. Examples:

  • finish a chapter
  • upgrade a subsystem
  • unlock a feature tier
  • complete an event milestone band
  • build a new district or unit composition

Ask:

  • Does the game provide medium-range projects worth caring about?
  • Do these goals create continuity between sessions?
  • Are they paced well, or do they feel either trivial or exhausting?
Long-term goals

Goals that define sustained engagement over days, weeks, or longer. Examples:

  • finish a season pass
  • complete a major collection
  • reach elder-game mastery
  • build out a city fantasy
  • reach endgame social or competitive status

Ask:

  • What gives long-term meaning to repeated sessions?
  • Are long-term goals visible enough to inspire commitment?
  • Are they aspirational, or just distant grind walls?

Use this format:

HorizonExamples PresentStrengthMain Issue
Short-term.........
Mid-term.........
Long-term.........

5. Audit session flexibility

Ask:

  • Can the game support different session lengths?
  • Can a player with 2 minutes, 10 minutes, or 45 minutes still do something meaningful?
  • Does the structure adapt to fragmented real-life schedules?
  • Does the design force one ideal session length too rigidly?

Look for:

  • flexible stopping points
  • scalable goal selection
  • both burst-friendly and longer-form activity options where appropriate

6. Audit session closure and safe stopping points

Ask:

  • Can the player end the session at a satisfying moment?
  • Does the game provide a sense of completion before exit?
  • Does the player feel safe leaving, or feel like the game is still on fire without them?
  • Are there explicit or implicit signs that nothing urgent remains?

Look for:

  • clear stopping moments
  • closure after achieving a goal
  • no lingering obligation spikes
  • reduced anxiety around leaving the game

7. Audit return triggers

Ask:

  • What unfinished business motivates return?
  • Does the player leave with a reason to come back?
  • Are return triggers restrictive and imposed, or self-owned and player-shaped?
  • Does the game model time away from play intelligently?

Look for:

  • production loops
  • chest timers
  • growth cycles
  • event cadence
  • self-set goals
  • appointment mechanics

Also ask:

  • Does the return trigger create anticipation, or only obligation?
  • Does it support agency, or mostly remove it?

8. Diagnose common failure patterns

Common patterns:

  • Goal drought - too few meaningful goals, player feels aimless
  • Goal smog - too many competing goals with no clear priority
  • No immediate hook - player returns but does not see what to do now
  • Chore density - many goals exist, but they feel trivial, repetitive, or low-meaning
  • Mid-term gap - good micro-goals and big aspirations, but weak medium-range projects
  • Long-term fog - sessions exist, but no larger arc gives them meaning
  • Bad fit for fragmented time - game only works in one session length
  • Unsafe exit - player feels punished or anxious for stopping
  • Obligation loop - return triggers rely on pressure more than anticipation

9. Convert findings into design actions

For each major issue, specify:

  • Issue
  • Why it hurts the experience
  • Affected horizon - short, mid, long, or session closure/return
  • Suggested change
  • Expected effect

Response structure

Audit Target

  • ...

Goal Immediacy

  • Strengths: ...
  • Weaknesses: ...

Goal Density

  • Strengths: ...
  • Weaknesses: ...

Time-Horizon Breakdown

  • Short-term: ...
  • Mid-term: ...
  • Long-term: ...

Session Closure

  • ...

Return Triggers

  • ...

Failure Patterns

  • ...

Recommendations

  1. ...
  2. ...
  3. ...

Fast mode

  • When the player returns, do they instantly see something meaningful to do?
  • Are there enough goals of different sizes to fit different session lengths?
  • What are the short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals?
  • Can the player stop safely and feel satisfied?
  • What specifically pulls them back next time?

References

Read these when useful:

  • references/goal-density-notes.md for the source-derived framing around player time, session anatomy, density of goals, and return triggers
  • references/failure-patterns.md for common goal-density and immediacy failure shapes

Working principle

Designing sessions means modeling the player's time both with the game and away from it. A strong game helps the player find a meaningful goal now, achieve enough to feel satisfied, and leave with a reason to come back.

平台分布

OpenClaw

82.15%
按下载量换算753

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

权限未标注

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills