quality-assurance
Skill0 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Run ISO 9001-aligned QA workflow — plan, execute, review, improve via evidence-backed checklists. Triggers "quality assurance", "ISO 9001 readiness", "delivery readiness", "corrective actions".
11 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- thistleknot/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- PhoenixNest/AGENT-GLOBAL-BASEtheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- attilaszasz/sdd-pilottheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- axross/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- jasonkneen/kirotheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- Ghosteken/agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Oct 1, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 11
- jasonkneen/kiro★ 753same name
- liangdabiao/claude-data-analysis-ultra-main★ 282same name
- attilaszasz/sdd-pilot★ 98same name
- nahisaho/MUSUBI★ 74same name
- liangdabiao/claudesdk-data-chat★ 4same name
- Ghosteken/agent-harness★ 2same name
- PhoenixNest/AGENT-GLOBAL-BASE★ 2same name
- axross/skills★ 1same name
- brylie/compendium★ 1same name
- matheusflorindo32/apex-elite-framework★ 0same name
1 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository45 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- plugin-v2/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- plugin-v2/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .cursor/rules/agents.mdcCursor rule
- agentic-security-reviewSkill
- arc42-baselineSkill
- caveman-commitSkill
- caveman-helpSkill
- caveman-reviewSkill
- cavemanSkill
- create-goalSkill
- design-twiceSkill
- discovery-sprintSkill
- domain-contextSkill
- github-project-setupSkill
- grillSkill
- improve-codebase-architectureSkill
- issue-breakdownSkill
- issue-draftSkill
- issue-pr-syncSkill
- new-adrSkill
- new-glossary-entrySkill
- orchestrateSkill
- portfolio-trackSkill
- product-pageSkill
- project-reviewSkill
- project-runSkill
- project-scaffoldingSkill
- quality-metricsSkill
- record-decisionSkill
- review-fixSkill
- roadmap-managementSkill
- sales-cycleSkill
- specorator-designSkill
- specorator-improvementSkill
- specorator-onboardSkill
- stock-takingSkill
- tackle-issueSkill
- tdd-cycleSkill
- token-budget-reviewSkill
- tracer-bulletSkill
- ubiquitous-languageSkill
- verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
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 9
Use this skill to guide a project, portfolio, release, or feature through an ISO 9001-aligned quality assurance workflow.
- Distinctive: line 43
Every check uses this evidence-first shape:
- Distinctive: line 61
Plan: Create a quality plan and checklist set.
- Distinctive: line 92
Do not claim ISO certification or external audit approval.
- Distinctive: line 93
Do not quote long ISO text or embed copyrighted standard content.
- Very specific: line 94
Do not hide a gap by marking it not-applicable without a rationale.
- Distinctive: line 95
Do not close corrective actions without an effectiveness check.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Quality Assurance
Use this skill to guide a project, portfolio, release, or feature through an ISO 9001-aligned quality assurance workflow. The goal is to determine whether project execution is controlled enough to deliver a quality product, then turn gaps into corrective actions.
This skill supports readiness and evidence gathering. It does not certify the organization, replace an accredited auditor, or reproduce ISO standard text.
ISO baseline
As of 2026-04-28, ISO 9001:2015 remains the current published ISO 9001 requirements edition, with ISO 9001:2015/Amd 1:2024 listed by ISO and ISO/FDIS 9001 under development for a future edition. Use clause labels and the team's own evidence questions; do not copy standard text.
Reference: https://www.iso.org/standard/62085.html
Phases
| Phase | Command | Primary outputs |
| Start | /quality:start <slug> [scope] | quality/<slug>/quality-state.md |
| Plan | /quality:plan <slug> | quality-plan.md, checklists/project-execution.md |
| Check | /quality:check <slug> | Completed checklist evidence and gap statuses |
| Review | /quality:review <slug> | quality-review.md |
| Improve | /quality:improve <slug> | improvement-plan.md |
Review dimensions
Tailor every checklist to the scope, but keep these dimensions visible:
- Context and interested parties.
- Leadership, roles, responsibilities, and quality policy alignment.
- Planning, risks, opportunities, and quality objectives.
- Support: resources, competence, awareness, communication, documented information.
- Operation: requirements, design, development, controls, suppliers, release readiness.
- Performance evaluation: monitoring, measurement, internal review, customer satisfaction, audit evidence.
- Improvement: nonconformity, corrective action, continual improvement.
Checklist item format
Every check uses this evidence-first shape:
- [ ] QA-<AREA>-NNN — <question>
- ISO 9001 area: <short label only>
- Evidence required: <file, command, meeting record, approval, metric, or checklist>
- Status: open | satisfied | gap | nonconformity | not-applicable
- Severity: S1 | S2 | S3 | S4
- Owner: <role/person>
- Due: YYYY-MM-DD | n/a
- Evidence: <links or "none yet">
- Notes: <short rationale>Procedure
- Intake gate. List
inputs/non-recursively before scoping. Surface every item via a singleAskUserQuestion: "I see N items ininputs/. Which are relevant for this quality review?" Common QA inputs: prior audit reports, supplier evidence packs, customer complaints, regulator letters, certificate copies. Never auto-extract archives. Cite paths intoinputs/fromquality-plan.mdand checklist evidence fields. Full contract:docs/inputs-ingestion.md. Decision: ADR-0017. - Start. Establish scope, product/service boundary, interested parties, applicable lifecycle/project artifacts, quality objectives, and evidence locations. Record whether this is internal readiness, supplier assurance, release readiness, or formal audit preparation.
- Plan. Create a quality plan and checklist set. Derive checks from scoped artifacts instead of using only generic ISO labels.
- Check. Execute checklist items against evidence. Run deterministic verification where available. Record gaps plainly and keep open items visible.
- Review. Summarize readiness, nonconformities, risks, and evidence gaps. Use
ready,ready-with-conditions,not-ready, orblocked. - Improve. Convert findings into corrective actions, assign owners, define effectiveness checks, and link actions into the active project/spec/release artifacts.
Severity guide
S1— delivery should stop: missing product requirements, uncontrolled release, severe compliance/security/data risk, or no owner for a critical nonconformity.S2— delivery at risk unless corrected before the next gate.S3— manageable gap with an owner and follow-up date.S4— improvement opportunity or minor documentation cleanup.
Reporting
Report:
- quality review path,
- readiness verdict,
- S1/S2 findings count,
- verification commands run,
- corrective actions opened,
- remaining evidence gaps.
For a deterministic KPI snapshot before or during the review, use the quality-metrics skill or run:
specorator quality:metricsDo not
- Do not claim ISO certification or external audit approval.
- Do not quote long ISO text or embed copyrighted standard content.
- Do not hide a gap by marking it
not-applicablewithout a rationale. - Do not close corrective actions without an effectiveness check.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
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.

