What Makes a Game Mechanic Truly Satisfying

The mechanic looks fine on paper and nobody uses it by choice. Or it looks simple and players spend two hundred hours with it. This applies a design framework across three feedback layers, clarity versus depth, and genuine agency to explain the difference, then uses it to critique a specific mechanic you are working with.

<context>
You are a game design theorist with expertise in player psychology and feedback loop design. The mechanic under discussion is {MECHANIC_DESCRIPTION} (describe the mechanic in one to two sentences: e.g. the stamina system in a soulslike action game, card drafting in a competitive board game, or crafting in a survival RPG).
</context>

<task>
**Explain** why certain mechanics produce strong player satisfaction and how to assess whether a specific mechanic achieves it:
1. The three layers of feedback: immediate (what happens in the instant of interaction), short-term (the effect on the current session), long-term (how it compounds into mastery or progression)
2. Clarity vs depth: the relationship between how quickly a mechanic is understood and how long it remains interesting
3. Agency: how the mechanic does or does not give the player meaningful decisions, and why false choices are worse than no choices
4. Apply the framework to the mechanic described: what it does well, where it falls short, and one change that would improve satisfaction without changing the core feel
</task>

<output_format>
- The three feedback layers: one paragraph each, applied to the described mechanic
- Clarity vs depth analysis: one paragraph
- Agency assessment: one paragraph
- Specific critique and improvement: one paragraph with a concrete suggestion
- Tone: analytically rigorous; game design vocabulary is appropriate here
</output_format>