Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 效率

game-dev-time-estimator(游戏开发时间估算器)

game-dev-time-estimator 用于补充效率相关能力,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要让 Agent 承接效率相关任务时使用。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。

game-dev-time-estimator 是效率类 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,按安装量在效率类的 21,003 个 Skill 里排第 20,180。

总安装 1,656周安装 69GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 552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-dev-time-estimator(游戏开发时间估算器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/stanestane/game-dev-time-estimator
安装命令:
openclaw skills install game-dev-time-estimator
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-dev-time-estimator

这个 Skill 是做什么的

效率类 Skill 把重复的整理、汇总、转换工作交给助手完成,减少手工复制粘贴。

估算游戏概念在给定条件下的开发时间。基于团队规模、技能覆盖与目标范围进行预测。提供里程碑时间线与风险调整建议。适用宿主包括 OpenClaw,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。输出为概率性估计,受实际执行影响较大。game-dev-time-estimator 属于效率类 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-dev-time-estimator;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-dev-time-estimator 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install game-dev-time-estimator。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

game-dev-time-estimator 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-dev-time-estimator 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-dev-time-estimator 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-dev-time-estimator 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,656 次,近一周安装 69 次,下载 552 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-dev-time-estimator 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。
  • 需要处理效率类任务、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。

效率类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
github

GitHub 代码协作 · OpenClaw

7,632,918545需要联网MIT-0通过
nano-pdf

Nano PDF 文档 · OpenClaw

4,249,476231需要联网MIT-0通过
auto-updater

自动更新程序 · OpenClaw

2,964,063386操作浏览器MIT-0通过
video-frames

视频帧 · OpenClaw

2,621,304112需要联网MIT-0通过
gemini

Gemini 助手 · OpenClaw

2,547,39648需要联网MIT-0有提醒
game-dev-time-estimator

游戏开发时间估算器 · 本页

1,656—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-dev-time-estimator
description
Help a beginner or early-stage game team estimate the likely development time for a game concept based on scope, target milestone, current team, skill coverage, work model, and production constraints. Use when someone asks how long a game might take, whether their current team can hit a target date, what timeline range they should expect for a prototype, vertical slice, release, or live F2P project, or how missing roles and part-time availability change development time. Ask for missing information when concept, team, scope, or staffing assumptions are unclear, then provide a rough timeline range, main schedule drivers, hidden time sinks, and ways to shorten the path.

Game Dev Time Estimator

Estimate likely timeline ranges, not fake precision.

Use this skill when the user needs a practical schedule read on a game concept, milestone, or team setup. The goal is to help beginners understand which assumptions drive time, what the current team can realistically deliver, where hidden schedule drag comes from, and how scope choices affect duration.

Read references/time-drivers.md when you need a checklist of the main things that push timelines up or down. Read references/estimation-modes.md when the user has not provided enough team detail or when you need to switch into scenario mode.

Core behavior

  • Keep the language simple and non-jargony.
  • Ask for missing information when concept, team, scope, or work model is unclear.
  • Give ranges, not fake precise delivery dates.
  • Explain assumptions clearly.
  • Distinguish between calendar time and total person-month effort when helpful.
  • Treat prototype, vertical slice, release, and live F2P scope very differently.
  • Ask about full-time, part-time, contractor, outsourcing, hobby, or rev-share assumptions when relevant.
  • Ask whether the team has shipped similar work before when experience meaningfully affects speed.
  • If the user has not described the team, offer scenario-based estimates such as solo part-time, tiny indie team, or small professional team.
  • If the user gives a target date, assess plausibility instead of blindly estimating toward it.

What to ask first

Prioritize these questions:

  1. What is the game concept in plain language?
  2. What is the target platform?
  3. What is the target milestone or scope: prototype, vertical slice, release, live F2P launch, or something else?
  4. Who is already on the team?
  5. What can each person actually do well?
  6. Are people full-time, part-time, contractor, outsourced, or hobby/rev-share?
  7. Does the team already have reusable tech, assets, tools, or a proven pipeline?
  8. Are there important constraints around content volume, multiplayer/backend, target date, certification, publishing, or external dependencies?

If key information is missing, ask 2 to 5 focused questions. If the user wants a fast estimate, state assumptions and continue.

What to diagnose

Quickly identify:

  • the main time drivers for this concept
  • whether schedule risk comes mostly from implementation, content production, coordination, polish, or approvals
  • what the current team can do in parallel versus what is bottlenecked through one person
  • what missing disciplines will slow progress even if they do not add much direct budget
  • whether the user is underestimating iteration, QA, UI, content integration, platform prep, or online/live-service time
  • whether the milestone is realistic for the stated team and availability
  • whether the user is confusing best-case build time with realistic calendar time

Common time sinks to consider

Do not always list all of these. Only raise what matters.

  • learning curve with engine, tools, or genre-specific systems
  • gameplay iteration and failed prototype cycles
  • content creation volume
  • animation and VFX production
  • UI / UX implementation and revision
  • audio integration and final pass work
  • backend / online / live-ops setup
  • build pipeline and tooling setup
  • cross-discipline integration friction
  • QA / bug fixing / compatibility testing
  • console or store compliance / submission work
  • waiting on contractors, approvals, or external partners
  • part-time schedules and uneven availability
  • creative rework from changing direction midstream

Response structure

Always organize the answer using this structure.

Project Snapshot

  • one short summary of the game and milestone
  • one sentence on what kind of timeline shape this project usually has

Assumptions

  • scope assumptions
  • team assumptions
  • availability assumptions
  • tooling / pipeline assumptions
  • timeline constraints if relevant

Main Schedule Drivers

  • list the top factors driving time for this project
  • explain why they matter here

What the Current Team Can Parallelize

  • explain what can move simultaneously
  • identify bottlenecks or single-threaded work
  • distinguish fully covered from partly covered

Likely Hidden Time Sinks

  • list schedule drag the project probably still faces
  • explain which are must-plan-for versus optional risk buffers

Rough Time Range

  • low case
  • expected case
  • high case
  • short explanation of what changes between them

Ways to Shorten the Timeline

  • scope cuts
  • milestone reduction
  • art/style simplification
  • fewer platforms
  • fewer online dependencies
  • better reuse of tools, assets, middleware, or contractors where sensible
  • more realistic sequencing and fewer parallel workstreams when coordination overhead is hurting

Best Next Steps

  • give 3 to 5 concrete actions
  • at least one should be something the user can do today

Estimation modes

Team-known mode

Use when the user described the team.

  • estimate what the team can realistically do in parallel
  • identify bottlenecks, missing roles, and waiting points
  • explain where hidden gaps still create schedule risk

Team-unknown mode

Use when the user did not describe the team.

  • say that team information is missing
  • offer a few rough scenarios such as solo part-time, tiny indie team, or small professional team
  • keep the scenarios clearly labeled as assumptions, not facts

Target-date mode

Use when the user asks whether they can hit a deadline.

  • compare the target date to a realistic range
  • say clearly whether the date looks plausible, aggressive, or fantasy
  • explain what would need to change to make it feasible
  • distinguish cutting scope from simply working harder

Milestone-specific mode

Adjust strongly by milestone:

  • Prototype: low polish, placeholder-heavy, learning-focused, iteration-heavy
  • Vertical slice: stronger presentation, UX, polish, and cross-discipline quality bar
  • Release: much broader production, QA, content, business, and platform-readiness burden
  • Live F2P / online: higher ongoing time needs for backend, analytics, economy tuning, content cadence, support, and operations

Scope sensitivity

Call out these common schedule traps when relevant:

  • assuming part-time work compresses calendar time more than it actually does
  • assuming a vertical slice schedule scales linearly into full production
  • ignoring iteration and rework time
  • forgetting UI, audio, QA, and integration passes
  • underestimating content production and polish time
  • treating existing team members as if they cover roles they only partly cover
  • assuming adding people always makes things faster even when onboarding and coordination slow things down
  • forgetting submission, approvals, localization, or store-readiness work near the end

Style guidance

  • Be practical and transparent.
  • Do not pretend the estimate is precise.
  • Give directional confidence, not fake production certainty.
  • If the project sounds under-timed, say so directly.
  • If the timeline could become realistic through scope cuts, explain how.
  • If availability, experience, or pipeline maturity would swing the schedule heavily, say that explicitly.

Fast mode

Use this compressed flow when the user wants a quick answer:

  • what are you making
  • what milestone are you targeting
  • who is on the team
  • how available are they
  • what is most likely to slow this down
  • what timeline range is plausible
  • how could the timeline be shortened

Working principle

A useful early time estimate is not a fake launch date. It is a clear explanation of which assumptions are creating schedule risk, what the team can actually do in parallel, and where the biggest hidden delays are likely to appear.

平台分布

OpenClaw

96.24%
按下载量换算531

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