重构插件入口与runtime安装流程

skills/brainstorm/DETAILS.md

@@ -11,9 +11,12 @@ When this skill is invoked:
 
    See `../../references/studio-docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern.
 
-   When a gate is active, spawn the named Codex custom agent that is already
-   defined in `../../.codex/agents/<agent-name>.toml`. Do not recreate the
-   director role by pasting profile text into a generic default agent.
+   Director agent source files live in `../../runtime/agents/`. Before running
+   any `full` review-mode gate, verify the target project has the matching
+   `.codex/agents/<agent-name>.toml` files installed. If they are missing, run
+   `$setup-runtime` for the project first. When a gate is active, spawn the
+   named Codex custom agent; do not recreate the director role by pasting
+   profile text into a generic default agent.
 
 2. **Check for existing concept work**:
    - Read `design/gdd/game-concept.md` if it exists (resume, don't restart)
@@ -24,13 +27,17 @@ When this skill is invoked:
    exploration** where the AI acts as a creative facilitator, not a replacement
    for the human's vision.
 
-   **Use `ask the user in chat`** at key decision points throughout brainstorming:
+   **Use a structured decision prompt when available** at key decision points
+   throughout brainstorming. In Codex, use the current user-input mechanism if
+   it is available in the active mode; otherwise ask the same question directly
+   in chat and wait for the user's reply.
    - Constrained taste questions (genre preferences, scope, team size)
    - Concept selection ("Which 2-3 concepts resonate?") after presenting options
    - Direction choices ("Develop further, explore more, or prototype?")
    - Pillar ranking after concepts are refined
    Write full creative analysis in conversation text first, then use
-   `ask the user in chat` to capture the decision with concise labels.
+   the structured prompt or chat question to capture the decision with concise
+   labels.
 
    Professional studio brainstorming principles to follow:
    - Withhold judgment — no idea is bad during exploration
@@ -55,18 +62,19 @@ conversationally (not as a checklist):
 **Taste profile**:
 - What 3 games have you spent the most time with? What kept you coming back?
   *(Ask this as plain text — the user must be able to type specific game names freely.
-  Do NOT put this in an ask the user in chat with preset options.)*
+  Do NOT put this in a structured prompt with preset options.)*
 - Are there genres you love? Genres you avoid? Why?
 - Do you prefer games that challenge you, relax you, tell you stories,
-  or let you express yourself? *(Use `ask the user in chat` for this — constrained choice.)*
+  or let you express yourself? *(Use a structured prompt for this when available — constrained choice.)*
 
 **Practical constraints** (shape the sandbox before brainstorming).
-Bundle these into a single multi-tab `ask the user in chat` with these exact tab labels:
+Bundle these into a single multi-field structured prompt when available:
 - Tab "Experience" — "What kind of experience do you most want players to have?" (Challenge & Mastery / Story & Discovery / Expression & Creativity / Relaxation & Flow)
 - Tab "Timeline" — "What's your realistic development timeline?" (Weeks / Months / 1-2 years / Multi-year)
 - Tab "Dev level" — "Where are you in your dev journey?" (First game / Shipped before / Professional background)
 
-Use exactly these tab names — do not rename or duplicate them.
+If the UI supports grouping fields, use exactly these group names. If not,
+ask the three questions one at a time.
 
 **Synthesize** the answers into a **Creative Brief** — a 3-5 sentence
 summary of the person's emotional goals, taste profile, and constraints.
@@ -104,12 +112,13 @@ For each concept, present:
 - **Why It Could Work** (1 sentence on market/audience fit)
 - **Biggest Risk** (1 sentence on the hardest unanswered question)
 
-Present all three. Then use `ask the user in chat` to capture the selection.
+Present all three. Then use a structured prompt or direct chat question to
+capture the selection.
 
-**CRITICAL**: This MUST be a plain list call — no tabs, no form fields. Use exactly this structure:
+**CRITICAL**: This MUST be a plain list choice, not a multi-field form. Use this structure:
 
 ```
-ask the user in chat(
+structured decision prompt(
   prompt: "Which concept resonates with you? You can pick one, combine elements, or ask for fresh directions.",
   options: [
     "Concept 1 — [Title]",
@@ -121,7 +130,7 @@ ask the user in chat(
 )
 ```
 
-Do NOT use a `tabs` field here. The `tabs` form is for multi-field input only — using it here causes an "Invalid tool parameters" error. This is a plain `prompt` + `options` call.
+Do NOT use a multi-field form here. This is a plain prompt plus options.
 
 Never pressure toward a choice — let them sit with it.
 
@@ -135,7 +144,7 @@ isolation, no amount of content or polish will save the game.
 
 **30-Second Loop** (moment-to-moment):
 
-Ask these as `ask the user in chat` calls — derive the options from the chosen concept, don't hardcode them:
+Ask these as structured prompts when available — derive the options from the chosen concept, don't hardcode them:
 
 1. **Core action feel** — prompt: "What's the primary feel of the core action?" Generate 3-4 options that fit the concept's genre and tone, plus a free-text escape (`I'll describe it`).
 
@@ -184,11 +193,11 @@ Then define **3+ anti-pillars** (what this game is NOT):
   be cool if..." features that don't serve the core vision
 - Frame as: "We will NOT do [thing] because it would compromise [pillar]"
 
-**Pillar confirmation**: After presenting the full pillar set, use `ask the user in chat`:
+**Pillar confirmation**: After presenting the full pillar set, use a structured prompt:
 - Prompt: "Do these pillars feel right for your game?"
 - Options: `[A] Lock these in` / `[B] Rename or reframe one` / `[C] Swap a pillar out` / `[D] Something else`
 
-If the user selects B, C, or D, make the revision, then use `ask the user in chat` again:
+If the user selects B, C, or D, make the revision, then use a structured prompt again:
 - Prompt: "Pillars updated. Ready to lock these in?"
 - Options: `[A] Lock these in` / `[B] Revise another pillar` / `[C] Something else`
 
@@ -207,7 +216,7 @@ Repeat until the user selects [A] Lock these in.
 - **`art-director`** — gate **AD-CONCEPT-VISUAL** (`../../references/studio-docs/director-gates.md`)
   Pass: game concept elevator pitch, full pillar set with design tests, target platform (if known), any reference games or visual touchstones the user mentioned.
 
-Collect both verdicts, then present them together using a two-tab `ask the user in chat`:
+Collect both verdicts, then present them together using a structured prompt:
 - Tab **"Pillars"**: present creative-director feedback. Options mirror the standard CD-PILLARS handling — `Lock in as-is` / `Revise [specific pillar]` / `Discuss further`.
 - Tab **"Visual anchor"**: present the art-director's 2-3 named visual direction options. Options: each named direction (one per option) + `Combine elements across directions` + `Describe my own direction`.
 
@@ -236,12 +245,12 @@ who this game is actually for:
 
 Ground the concept in reality:
 
-- **Target platform**: Use `ask the user in chat` — "What platforms are you targeting for this game?"
+- **Target platform**: Use a structured prompt when available — "What platforms are you targeting for this game?"
   Options: `PC (Steam / Epic)` / `Mobile (iOS / Android)` / `Console` / `Web / Browser` / `Multiple platforms`
   Record the answer — it directly shapes the engine recommendation and will be passed to `/setup-engine`.
   Note platform implications if relevant (e.g., mobile means Unity is strongly preferred; console means Godot has limitations; web means Godot exports cleanly).
 
-- **Engine experience**: Use `ask the user in chat` — "Do you already have an engine you work in?"
+- **Engine experience**: Use a structured prompt when available — "Do you already have an engine you work in?"
   Options: `Godot` / `Unity` / `Unreal Engine 5` / `No preference — help me decide`
   - If they pick an engine → record it as their preference and move on. Do NOT second-guess it.
   - If "No preference" → tell them: "Run `/setup-engine` after this session — it will walk you through the full decision based on your concept and platform target." Do not make a recommendation here.
@@ -290,13 +299,13 @@ Present the assessment to the user. If UNREALISTIC, offer to adjust the MVP defi
    This section is the seed of the art bible — it captures the "everything must
    move" decision before it can be forgotten between sessions.
 
-5. Use `ask the user in chat` for write approval:
+5. Use a structured prompt or direct chat question for write approval:
 - Prompt: "Game concept is ready. May I write it to `design/gdd/game-concept.md`?"
 - Options: `[A] Yes — write it` / `[B] Not yet — revise a section first`
 
-If [B]: ask which section to revise using `ask the user in chat` with options: `Elevator Pitch` / `Core Fantasy & Unique Hook` / `Pillars` / `Core Loop` / `MVP Definition` / `Scope Tiers` / `Risks` / `Something else — I'll describe`
+If [B]: ask which section to revise using a structured prompt with options: `Elevator Pitch` / `Core Fantasy & Unique Hook` / `Pillars` / `Core Loop` / `MVP Definition` / `Scope Tiers` / `Risks` / `Something else — I'll describe`
 
-After revising, show the updated section as a diff or clear before/after, then use `ask the user in chat` — "Ready to write the updated concept document?"
+After revising, show the updated section as a diff or clear before/after, then ask — "Ready to write the updated concept document?"
 Options: `[A] Yes — write it` / `[B] Revise another section`
 Repeat until the user selects [A].