Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

game-design-pitch-deck-audit(游戏设计宣传材料审核)

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-pitch-deck-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为只读;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 29,506。

总安装 3,041周安装 123GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 954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-pitch-deck-audit(游戏设计宣传材料审核)
来源仓库:https://github.com/stanestane/game-design-pitch-deck-audit
安装命令:
openclaw skills install game-design-pitch-deck-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-pitch-deck-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。

审核游戏宣传资料的结构清晰度与投资说服力。适用于融资材料、发行商提案或对外演示文稿检查。提供可读性、逻辑流与视觉呈现方面的改进意见。建议配合真实受众反馈综合使用,避免仅依赖文本分析。game-design-pitch-deck-audit 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

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-pitch-deck-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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

game-design-pitch-deck-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install game-design-pitch-deck-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-pitch-deck-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-pitch-deck-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

game-design-pitch-deck-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-pitch-deck-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 3,041 次,近一周安装 123 次,下载 954 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-pitch-deck-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。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

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-pitch-deck-audit

游戏设计宣传材料审核 · 本页

3,041—只读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-pitch-deck-audit
description
Audit a video game pitch deck, publisher deck, funding deck, or investor-facing game presentation for clarity, structure, persuasiveness, visual readability, business-case completeness, and publisher-fit. Use when reviewing a pitch deck before sending to publishers, polishing a deck for meetings, checking whether the deck answers the essential questions about who, what, why, when, budget, and opportunity, or evaluating whether a deck sells both the game and the collaboration case rather than just dumping information.

Game Design Pitch Deck Audit

Audit a game pitch deck as both a persuasion tool and a business-case artifact.

Use this skill to evaluate whether a game pitch deck is clear, compelling, visually readable, and properly structured for publisher or funding conversations. Focus on whether the deck makes a strong case for the team, the game, the opportunity, the ask, and the path to completion.

Core principle

A good pitch deck does not merely describe a game. It builds confidence in the team, sells the dream of the project, proves the work, frames the opportunity, and makes a realistic ask.

What to produce

Generate:

  1. Deck overview - what the deck is trying to do and for whom
  2. Structure audit - whether the core sections are present and in a persuasive order
  3. Content audit - strengths, gaps, and weak claims
  4. Visual/readability audit - whether the deck is easy to follow without live narration
  5. Publisher-fit audit - whether the deck answers the practical questions a publisher or funder will ask
  6. Recommendations - what to cut, strengthen, reorder, or add

Audit lenses

Audit the deck through these lenses:

  • Who - who is making the game and why they are credible
  • Why / opportunity - why this project exists and why now
  • What - what the game is, what makes it stand out, and what the final vision is
  • Proof - what already exists that proves the team can deliver
  • Business case - comparables, target audience, monetization, market logic, and opportunity
  • Ask - budget, timeline, platforms, scope, and what support is being requested
  • Readability - whether the deck works when sent ahead of a meeting without narration

Process

1. Define the deck context

Clarify:

  • who the audience is: publisher, investor, platform, partner, grant body
  • whether this deck is meant to be sent async, presented live, or both
  • what stage the project is in: concept, prototype, vertical slice, production
  • whether the deck is accompanied by a build, trailer, GDD, or other materials

2. Audit the high-level structure

Check whether the deck answers the essential questions:

  • What are you making?
  • Why are you making it?
  • Who is making it?
  • Where do you want to go?
  • What do you need to get there?
  • When will you get there?

Also check whether the deck roughly covers:

  • team / studio credibility
  • artistic why
  • business why / opportunity
  • dream of the game
  • proof of the game
  • work / systems / core loop
  • market or comparables
  • timeline and budget
  • summary and contact info

3. Audit the team and credibility section

Ask:

  • does the deck establish why this team should be trusted?
  • does it show relevant shipped work, experience, or platform familiarity?
  • is it concise, or does it waste time on irrelevant biography?
  • does it explain who will actually make the game if funded?

4. Audit the game pitch itself

Check for three distinct functions:

  • Dream - does the deck sell the final vision of the game?
  • Proof - does it show prototype, vertical slice, or other non-speculative evidence?
  • Work - does it explain how the game operates, what the core loop is, and why the game is compelling?

Ask:

  • is the hook clear quickly?
  • are the unique selling points obvious?
  • does the deck lean into strengths strongly enough?
  • does it show what is familiar and then what is unique?
  • does it explain why the game matters, not just what it contains?

5. Audit the business case

Ask:

  • does the deck explain the opportunity and target audience?
  • are comparables believable and useful rather than vanity references?
  • is monetization or business model clearly stated if relevant?
  • is the market framing grounded, or just wishful genre enthusiasm?
  • does the deck sell the collaboration case, not just the product fantasy?

6. Audit the ask

Check whether the deck makes a realistic ask around:

  • budget
  • timeline
  • platforms
  • release window
  • build status
  • support needed

Ask:

  • is the budget plausible and safely scoped?
  • are the timeline ratios believable?
  • is the ask too low in a way that signals inexperience?
  • does the deck separate development needs from broader publishing or marketing assumptions when relevant?

7. Audit deck usability and readability

Ask:

  • does the deck work without live commentary?
  • is the text readable and concise?
  • are the slides overcrowded?
  • does imagery carry the message effectively?
  • are GIFs, videos, mockups, or key art used meaningfully?
  • is the style aligned with the tone of the game?
  • does the deck avoid pointless bullet sludge?

8. Audit submission readiness

If the deck is intended for publishers, check whether the package likely includes or references:

  • a playable build
  • control notes if needed
  • skippable cutscenes or checkpoints if relevant to the build
  • budget in practical terms
  • timeline to release
  • supplementary materials that help a stranger understand the project quickly

9. Diagnose common failure patterns

Common pitch-deck failure patterns:

  • Identity fog - unclear what the game actually is
  • Dream without proof - strong fantasy, weak evidence
  • Proof without dream - lots of prototype facts, no compelling vision
  • Bio bloat - too much team info with too little relevance
  • Market handwaving - vague business claims with weak comparables
  • Budget naivety - undercooked ask or unrealistic timeline
  • Narration dependency - deck only works if someone explains everything live
  • Template autopilot - all the right sections exist, but the deck says nothing memorable
  • Visual sludge - unreadable, cramped, or aesthetically disconnected from the game

10. Convert findings into recommendations

For each issue, specify:

  • Problem
  • Why it hurts the pitch
  • Fix direction
  • Priority - critical / important / polish

Response structure

Deck Overview

  • ...

Structure Audit

  • Present: ...
  • Missing or weak: ...

Content Audit

  • Team credibility: ...
  • Game hook: ...
  • Proof: ...
  • Business case: ...
  • Ask: ...

Visual / Readability Audit

  • ...

Publisher-Fit Audit

  • ...

Failure Patterns

  • ...

Recommendations

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

Fast mode

  • What is the game?
  • Why this team?
  • Why this opportunity?
  • What proof already exists?
  • What is the ask?
  • Would this deck still make sense if read without you in the room?

References

Read these when useful:

  • references/pitch-deck-notes.md for distilled deck structure and slide expectations from the templates
  • references/raw-fury-notes.md for the Raw Fury-specific pitch expectations

Working principle

A good pitch deck should make a stranger understand the game, trust the team, believe the opportunity, and feel the ask is grounded.

平台分布

OpenClaw

74.13%
按下载量换算707

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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