dept-qa
Skill2 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
QA. FIRST, before code-review, for tests and verification: \"escribe tests\", \"hay un bug\", \"no funciona\", \"regresión\", \"revisa mi código\". Closes every L1+ task.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
Where: do the tests live — which pyramid level (unit, integration, e2e) and which files?
- Very specific: line 30
Does not own: what to build → dept-product · layer rules → dept-architecture · CI pipelines and release → dept-devops · security testing …
- Distinctive: line 36
Test pyramid — choose the level
- Distinctive: line 39
Run the quality gates yourself
- Distinctive: line 46
Prefer: keep tests deterministic: control clock, randomness, network and shared state.
- Distinctive: line 47
Prefer: test public behavior, not private implementation details.
- Distinctive: line 48
Never weaken, skip or delete tests or lint rules to get green.
- Distinctive: line 49
Never mock the unit under test or mock so much the test proves nothing.
- Distinctive: line 50
Never run the quality score on L0/L1 work unless asked.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Quality Assurance & Testing
Quick ref
Mission: Prove every change works, keeps working and meets the Definition of Done before anyone says "done".
Rules: failing test before the fix or feature (TDD) · every bug fix ships a regression test · deterministic tests of public behavior · never weaken tests or lint to get green
Skills by default: code-review · simplify (L3) · library-docs (browser-verify = the eyes at the end of a seen change; run only when the user asks)
DoD: tests cover the change, edge and error paths included, review findings resolved or justified.
Entry
Guest (no Waymark block in context) → ../waymark/references/coexistence.md §3. Reads:
- Learnings:
~/.waymark/learnings/dept-qa.mdif it exists. - Stack profile: Commands + Testing.
Brief questions
- What behavior is being added, changed or broken? (observed vs expected for bugs)
- Why / for whom does it matter — which user journey or acceptance criterion does it protect?
- Where do the tests live — which pyramid level (unit, integration, e2e) and which files?
- How is it reproduced or exercised — exact steps, inputs, data, viewport?
- Which gate commands apply (from project memory) and are any already red before the change?
- Is UI affected? Prove it with specs and the build, then the eyes (
browser-verify): a measurement or a real click on the local dev server after the last change. - What does done look like — which tests must pass and what must be observed running?
Scope
- Owns: test strategy and pyramid, TDD, regression tests, running and interpreting quality gates, browser verification (the eyes automatic at a seen change; wider only when the user asks), code review of the diff, the quality score, the Definition of Done every department inherits.
- Does not own: what to build →
dept-product· layer rules →dept-architecture· CI pipelines and release →dept-devops· security testing depth →dept-security· accessibility design decisions →dept-ux-ui.
Procedures
In procedures.md (same folder), one section per task; a reported bug → Quick bug triage first:
- Quick bug triage (L1)
- Test pyramid — choose the level
- New feature or behavior (TDD: red / green / refactor)
- Bug fix
- Run the quality gates yourself
- Browser verification (the eyes: automatic at a seen change; wider only when the user asks)
- Code review (L2+, before done or a PR)
- Quality score (L3 or explicit request only)
Rules
- See a new test fail before making it pass.
- Prefer: keep tests deterministic: control clock, randomness, network and shared state.
- Prefer: test public behavior, not private implementation details.
- Never weaken, skip or delete tests or lint rules to get green.
- Never mock the unit under test or mock so much the test proves nothing.
- Never run the quality score on L0/L1 work unless asked.
Tools
| Capability | Skill / MCP / Agent | When | Level |
| test.browser | browser-verify | The eyes at the end of a seen change; e2e journeys when the user asks | — |
| app.run | run | Reproduce a bug or observe the change running | L2 |
| review.diff | code-review | Before done or opening a PR | L2 |
| review.simplify | simplify | Clean-up after green, behavior-preserving | L3 |
| ui.audit | ui-audit | Significant UI change; WCAG 2.2 AA check | L2 |
| docs.library | library-docs (→ the docs MCP servers the user has) | Test runner, assertion or mocking API not verified this session | Q |
| search.codebase | Explore agent | Finding existing tests, fixtures, helpers across >3 locations | L1 |
| memory | Waymark memory: the pack the hook hands over, W memory / tasks, and engram search (or mem_search) | Prior decisions and root causes; what you learn goes in the Cierre's Aprendido (the hook saves it to engram) | L1 |
| mutation / load testing | none yet → waymark references/skills.md | Critical logic or performance budgets | L3 |
Definition of Done
- Bug fixes have a regression test that failed first
- Edge cases and error paths covered
code-reviewfindings resolved or justified (L2+)- Quality score with fixes for areas < 8 (L3 or on request)
Hand-offs
- To
dept-product: acceptance criteria missing or ambiguous. - To
dept-architecture: a bug or score reveals a structural or boundary problem. - To
dept-ux-ui:ui-auditfinds accessibility or hierarchy issues. - To
dept-security: a finding touches auth, input validation, secrets or dependencies. - To
dept-data: failures caused by state, caching or persistence design. - To
dept-devops: gates pass locally but fail in CI, or build/environment issues. - To
dept-devex: a gate command, skill or registry entry misbehaves.
Learned rules
Grows with use (../waymark/references/learning.md).
In this repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- browser-verifySkill
- dept-architectureSkill
- dept-backendSkill
- dept-dataSkill
- dept-devexSkill
- dept-devopsSkill
- dept-frontendSkill
- dept-productSkill
- dept-securitySkill
- dept-ux-uiSkill
- library-docsSkill
- ui-auditSkill
- ui-buildSkill
- ui-refineSkill
- ui-systemSkill
- waymarkSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

