perf-profile

!`bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys performance.enforce,automation,workflow` Resolved above — use as-is. No block → defaults in `.claude/docs/config-resolution.md`. # Performance Profile Every `AskUserQuestion` call follows `.claude/docs/automation-modes.md` (collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds; `automation_always_ask` categories always prompt). ## Insufficient input — check this before producing any report **If the inputs this skill needs do not exist, the answer is "could not run" — not a filled-in report.** Check first, and stop if the check fails. 1. List the inputs this skill reads (data files, prior reports, profiler output, test results, registries, source code). 2. For each, record `FOUND` or `ABSENT` — not "assumed present". 3. If any input required for a section is ABSENT, that section is **`NOT ASSESSED — NO DATA`**. Do not estimate it, do not infer it from an adjacent artifact, and do not leave a mandated cell to be filled by whoever reads the template next. 4. If **every** required input is ABSENT, stop and report **`NOT ASSESSED — NO DATA`** as the whole verdict, naming what was missing and which skill produces it. **A verdict of `NOT ASSESSED` is a success.** It is the correct, useful answer to "what does the data say?" when there is no data. The failure mode this prevents is specific: a report whose verdict enum has no "could not run" state produces **false clean passes** — an asset audit returning COMPLIANT on a project with no assets and no standards, or a performance profile reporting ">99% headroom against a 16.67ms budget" with zero profiler data and no budget ever set. **Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence.** A scan that finds no matches because there are no files to scan has not verified anything. Say which of the two happened — a reader cannot tell from a green result. --- ## Phase 0: Resolve Budget Enforcement `performance.enforce` decides what a budget violation *means* in this run. It does not change which budgets are measured — `performance.target_framerate`, `frame_budget_ms`, `draw_call_limit` and `memory_ceiling_mb` are profiled the same way at every level: | Value | Effect on this profile's findings | |-------|-----------------------------------| | `warn` (default) | Violations are reported as findings. They do not block; CI logs them without failing. | | `block` | Violations are **blockers**. Say so explicitly in the report — a `block` project treats an over-budget system as release-stopping, and `/gate-check` will FAIL the Polish gate on it. | | `off` | Budgets are informational only. Still report measured values, but do not raise violations as findings or recommendations to fix. | Only `warn`, `block` and `off` are recognized. Surface any other value to the user and fall back to `warn` rather than guessing. > The value is locally overridable (`/settings --local performance.enforce=block`), > so use the resolved block above rather than reading `project.yaml` — a > teammate's stricter local setting is meant to bite on their machine only. ## 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 **Read the committed budgets from config first** — they are the project's record of what it agreed to, and design docs are the fallback, not the source: ```bash bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" get_effective_yaml_key performance.target_framerate bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" get_effective_yaml_key performance.frame_budget_ms bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" get_effective_yaml_key performance.draw_call_limit bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" get_effective_yaml_key performance.memory_ceiling_mb ``` Run each line as its own plain command, one key per call: the helper moves to the project root itself, so it works when the session was started in a subfolder, and this skill pre-approves that form only (a `source` or `cd ... &&` wrapper asks the user every time). Empty output means that budget is not set. > **Resolve these budgets from `project.yaml`, not from prose.** Phase 0 above > states these four budgets "are profiled the same way at every level". A user > who set `performance.target_framerate: 60` in `project.yaml` has it ignored if > the budget is read from design docs or CLAUDE.md instead. Then fall back to design docs or CLAUDE.md for anything config does not carry: - 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) **A metric with no committed budget is `NOT ASSESSED`, not a pass.** Do not measure against the template's `[16.67ms]` placeholder — an unset budget is not a budget that was met, and reporting headroom against a number nobody chose is the exact fabrication this skill's own header warns about. --- ## 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 **Write the report to `production/polish/[scope]-report-[date].md`**, asking first per the Collaboration Protocol: *"May I write this profiling report to `production/polish/[scope]-report-[date].md`?"* Create the directory if absent. > **Name the destination — do not just render the template into the > conversation.** A profile that lives only in the transcript is gone the moment > the session ends, and no two runs can be compared. `production/polish/` > is the same location `/team-polish` writes, deliberately: a profile taken by > either route belongs in one place, or the comparison this skill exists to enable > cannot be made. > > If a `NOT ASSESSED` section survives into the report, keep it in the written > file. A profile whose gaps are edited out on the way to disk reads, later, as a > complete measurement. ```markdown ## Performance Profile: [System or Full] Generated: [Date] ### Performance Budgets | Metric | Budget | Estimated Current | Status | |--------|--------|-------------------|--------| | Frame time | [16.67ms] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER/NOT ASSESSED] | | Memory | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER/NOT ASSESSED] | | Load time | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER/NOT ASSESSED] | | Draw calls | [target] | [estimate] | [OK/WARNING/OVER/NOT ASSESSED] | ### 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 against each budget that is set — for a metric with none, `no budget set — headroom not assessed` — 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 — at `workflow: minimal`, which has no sprints, add it to the brief's build order) - **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`. --- ## Verdict Close every run that produced a report — whether or not Phase 5 ran — with: Verdict: **COMPLETE** — performance profile generated (saved to `production/polish/[scope]-report-[date].md` if the write was approved). The only other outcome is the `NOT ASSESSED — NO DATA` path above. --- ## 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` (at `workflow: minimal`, which has no sprints, add them to the brief's build order instead). ### 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