Phase 1: Determine Scope
Read the argument:
- System name → focus profiling on that specific system
full→ run a comprehensive profile across all systems
Phase 2: Load Performance Budgets
Check for existing performance targets in design docs or CLAUDE.md:
- Target FPS (e.g., 60fps = 16.67ms frame budget)
- Memory budget (total and per-system)
- Load time targets
- Draw call budgets
- Network bandwidth limits (if multiplayer)
Phase 3: Analyze Codebase
CPU Profiling Targets:
_process()/Update()/Tick()functions — list all and estimate cost- Nested loops over large collections
- String operations in hot paths
- Allocation patterns in per-frame code
- Unoptimized search/sort over game entities
- Expensive physics queries (raycasts, overlaps) every frame
Memory Profiling Targets:
- Large data structures and their growth patterns
- Texture/asset memory footprint estimates
- Object pool vs instantiate/destroy patterns
- Leaked references (objects that should be freed but aren't)
- Cache sizes and eviction policies
Rendering Targets (if applicable):
- Draw call estimates
- Overdraw from overlapping transparent objects
- Shader complexity
- Unoptimized particle systems
- Missing LODs or occlusion culling
I/O Targets:
- Save/load performance
- Asset loading patterns (sync vs async)
- Network message frequency and size
Phase 4: Generate Profiling Report
## Performance Profile: [System or Full]
Generated: [Date]
### Performance Budgets
| Metric | Budget | Estimated Current | Status |
|--------|--------|-------------------|--------|
| Frame time | [16.67ms] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER] |
| Memory | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER] |
| Load time | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER] |
| Draw calls | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER] |
### Hotspots Identified
| # | Location | Issue | Estimated Impact | Fix Effort |
|---|----------|-------|------------------|------------|
### Optimization Recommendations (Priority Order)
1. **[Title]** — [Description]
- Location: [file:line]
- Expected gain: [estimate]
- Risk: [Low/Med/High]
- Approach: [How to implement]
### Quick Wins (< 1 hour each)
- [Simple optimization 1]
### Requires Investigation
- [Area that needs actual runtime profiling to confirm impact]Output the report with a summary: top 3 hotspots, estimated headroom vs budget, and recommended next action.
Phase 5: Scope and Timeline Decision
Activate this phase only if any hotspot has Fix Effort rated M or L.
Present significant-effort items and ask the user to choose for each:
- A) Implement the optimization (proceed with fix now or schedule it)
- B) Reduce feature scope (run
/scope-check [feature]to analyze trade-offs) - C) Accept the performance hit and defer to Polish phase (log as known issue)
- D) Escalate to technical-director for an architectural decision (run
/architecture-decision)
If multiple items are deferred to Polish (choice C), record them under ### Deferred to Polish.
This skill is read-only — no files are written. Verdict: COMPLETE — performance profile generated.
Phase 6: Next Steps
- If bottlenecks require architectural change: run
/architecture-decision. - If scope reduction is needed: run
/scope-check [feature]. - To schedule optimizations: run
/sprint-plan update.
Rules
- Never optimize without measuring first — gut feelings about performance are unreliable
- Recommendations must include estimated impact — "make it faster" is not actionable
- Profile on target hardware, not just development machines
- Static analysis (this skill) identifies candidates; runtime profiling confirms