Files
aetherbound-guild/docs/reviews/PRE_DEVELOPMENT_READINESS_AUDIT.md
wushenghuaandCodex d454120074 docs: prepare outcome-synced R3 review
Record the integrated content, art, and audio outcome candidates, bind the verified audio dispatch, and update the readiness audit to the fixed product source.

Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-11 08:52:17 +08:00

6.7 KiB

Recruit-Line Pre-Development Readiness Audit

Date: 2026-08-11 Status: READY_FOR_DUAL_INDEPENDENT_REVIEW Integrated product source: f8d5bfe Frozen specification: .agent-taskgraph/spec.md revision design-spec-r3

Decision

The six design authorities, the forward repair for the failed first review, and the deterministic action-outcome repair with its content, art and audio sync have been integrated without write conflicts. The deterministic pre-development validator passes. The package is ready for two independent, read-only reviews with non-overlapping emphasis: systems integrity and player experience/production feasibility. It is not yet owner-approved and does not authorize HTML prototype, engine, asset generation, audio generation, packaging or release work.

Integrated Candidates

Workstream Candidate Scope
Core systems b0f9033, repair e598eed -> f55906e, 9be1927 four files under docs/product/
Content matrix 4e07a91 + 6a41189 -> 65f316d + 30fb0b9 docs/content/ only
UX and screen states c364a5e, repair c64b99e -> dc8d654, ec4863a two named presentation files
Art, animation and VFX ca4d3df -> 4b6270a art catalog only
Audio 1d51137, repair ff4101a -> 8b26e0a, f0095af audio catalog only
Design validator 493e714, repair e7f80d0 -> b2d8f7b, 83bba23 validator contract and executable only
Deterministic outcome authority 5a05ffc -> f2a3f3c battle systems authority only
Content outcome sync d5fd2fc -> edbd281 four content catalogs only
Art outcome sync 8c8c1b7 -> f8d5bfe art catalog only
Audio outcome sync ea69bc7 -> 404e996 audio catalog only

The content worker's exact identity ACK was observed at candidate close instead of before implementation. Runtime configuration, isolated worktree, exclusive write scope, two candidate commits and clean terminal are all independently recorded. This is a process-order deviation for reviewer awareness, not hidden evidence or a reason to upgrade product acceptance.

Verified Envelope

Domain Verified count or boundary
Professions 12 base + 24 advanced + 6 hidden = 42
Recruit traits 36
Equipment 320
Run artifacts 60
Ordinary/elite enemies 100
Bosses 16
Regions 8
Player-facing pages 50 complete screen definitions
Audio production IDs 32 music, 76 ambience, 228 shared SFX, 32 voice intents
Integration bindings 33 declarations; zero unresolved values

The product authority now uses generated recruits, repeated shop decisions, a single ordered horizontal party line, automatic combat, recruitment, dismissal, permanent casualty and replacement. Fixed protagonists, relationships, fixed six-person grid combat, three lanes and manual Directive/Anchor/Cache battle authority are retired.

The first independent review of fixed revision 7ffd6b0 failed because an ordinary dismissal could remove the final live Recruit and expose an undefined zero-Recruit Market. The forward repair now evaluates one canonical live_recruit_count at preview and commit, rejects final-survivor, stale, duplicate and interrupted dismissal without rebate or state mutation, and keeps casualty recovery and explicit run abandonment as separate transactions. UX exposes the rejection and a distinct OUT-006 abandonment confirmation that routes directly to run end rather than an empty Shop.

Systems R2 then failed fixed revision 7054fe6 because PF-A04 depended on undefined probabilistic hit/miss/evasion semantics. The forward repair keeps the product rule of no hidden miss chance, defines 12 deterministic AO_* terminal outcomes, and binds Turnblade, affected equipment/traits/enemies, VFX shapes, SFX and captions to those outcomes. Experience R2 was INVALID because its context named a nonexistent reference file; R3 must use the actual authorities docs/reference/REFERENCE_RUNTIME_CENSUS.md and docs/reference/TRANSFERABLE_STRUCTURE_LESSONS.md.

Reproducible Checks

Run from the repository root:

python3 tools/validate_predevelopment_design.py --self-test
python3 tools/validate_predevelopment_design.py
python3 tools/validate_predevelopment_design.py --json
git diff --check

Expected markers and counts:

ABG_PREDEVELOPMENT_DESIGN_SELF_TEST_OK cases=15
ABG_PREDEVELOPMENT_DESIGN_OK errors=0

The JSON result must contain "ok": true, an empty diagnostics array and the exact counts above.

tools/validate_design_contracts.py and the current prototype/site/ bundle belong to the superseded fixed-character, chapter-grid design. They are not evidence for this revision and must not be shown to the owner as the current game. Updating or replacing the HTML prototype is a later Goal after independent review and owner direction approval.

Independent Review Questions

  1. Does the ten-minute loop remain immediately understandable: inspect offers, recruit or buy, equip, reorder, choose risk, watch automatic combat, read casualties/rewards, then make the next shop decision?
  2. Does party order materially change protection, reach, movement, healing and replacement without recreating a hidden lane grid?
  3. Do permanent loss and price pressure create recoverable adaptation instead of an unrecoverable run collapse or a trivial dismissal exploit?
  4. Are all 42 professions, 36 traits, 320 equipment, 60 artifacts and 116 enemy identities decision-bearing rather than name-only filler?
  5. Are the five pacing profiles, save/failure transaction rules and postgame loop executable and mutually consistent?
  6. Can the 50-page landscape UX teach the loop without relying on prose-heavy documentation, unexplained icons or manual skill controls?
  7. Are the modular art and audio scopes feasible, original and consistent with generated recruits rather than fixed protagonists?
  8. Do any transferred structural lessons reproduce commercial expression, names, formulas, layouts, source or assets?

The systems reviewer owns questions 1-5 plus machine-checkable content coherence. The experience reviewer owns questions 6-8 plus production feasibility. Both must start at fixed-revision and validator gates; neither may reuse the failed 7ffd6b0 judgment as proof for the repaired source.

Open Gates

  • Two fresh independent reviewer terminals and PMO synthesis on one fixed clean revision.
  • Owner acceptance of game direction, comprehension, choice quality and scope.
  • Rebuilt landscape HTML gallery and interactive design prototype.
  • Final art/audio generation, integration, human visual review and listening.
  • Engine implementation, simulations, runtime, physical device and persistence.
  • Packaging, signing, stores, submission, publishing and release.