qa-testing
Skill0 starsChanged 7 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Plan and evidence software quality — test strategy and levels, test cases, entry/exit criteria, defects, UAT scripts, gate evidence linked to requirements, and the full-page UI visual review (cross-browser capture, baseline diff, accessibility, mobile performance) before a UI release. Use when designing tests or UAT, judging release readiness, reconciling results with the RTM, or reviewing, merging or deploying a user-facing UI change.
- Commits and pushes
9 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- rampstackco/claude-skills-startertheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Douglasst102/AgentSkillstheir own version, first seen Sep 28, 2026
- BejeweledMe/codex-pro-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 6, 2026
- felvieira/claude-skills-fvtheir own version, first seen Sep 2, 2026
- ElyzeSolutions/skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 6, 2026
- zazzcode/zazz-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 1, 2026
Other versions9 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 9
- felvieira/claude-skills-fv★ 27same name
- BejeweledMe/codex-pro-agent-skills★ 7same name
- Douglasst102/AgentSkills★ 4same name
- zazzcode/zazz-skills★ 4same name
- miketromba/skills★ 2same name
- rampstackco/claude-skills-starter★ 2same name
- ElyzeSolutions/skills★ 1same name
- goodnessibeh/ai-dev-boilerplate★ 1same name
- VodouAI/OS★ 1same name
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 repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-agentsSkill
- ai-agent-workflowsSkill
- ai-native-estimationSkill
- ai-product-deliverySkill
- book-dev-engineering-loopSkill
- business-analysisSkill
- client-discovery-and-proposalsSkill
- content-distributionSkill
- data-engineeringSkill
- flow-videoSkill
- game-engineeringSkill
- govern-ai-skillsSkill
- graphic-designSkill
- lead-research-and-crmSkill
- main-only-developmentSkill
- product-managementSkill
- product-ownerSkill
- project-managementSkill
- security-and-privacySkill
- skill-templateSkill
- solo-empire-operatorSkill
- solution-architectureSkill
- subagent-orchestrationSkill
- system-docpackSkill
- unused-file-cleanupSkill
- ux-reviewSkill
- xr-engineeringSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Read the system's requirements (SRS/FR-xx, user stories) and RTM, plus existing tests in the owning repository (unit, integration, E2E, …
- Distinctive: line 15
Run the existing suites when they are local and safe.
- Very specific: line 17
Write the test strategy: levels, scope per level, environments and data, tools, entry/exit criteria, defect severity and triage rules — …
- Distinctive: line 21
Write TC-xx cases (precondition, steps, expected result, linked FR-xx, status, evidence) and a UAT script for business testers.
- Distinctive: line 32
Follow its section 0 procedure: review every touched page and its sibling pages at 375 and 1440 (plus 320, 768 and 1024 for layout changes).
- Very specific: line 36
Before a release, add WebKit, Firefox and phone emulation (--browser, --device), the visual diff against the approved baseline …
- Very specific: line 44
Verify analytics before release: run checks 1–7 of the instrumentation verification in templates/sdlc/kpi-and-instrumentation-plan.md — …
- Very specific: line 55
Check release readiness against templates/development-cycle/quality-gate-pack.md.
- Very specific: line 56
After release, treat Sentry error issues, incident actions and failed instrumentation as test work: a reproducing test first, filed as one …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 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
QA and Testing
Make quality claims traceable: every priority requirement maps to a test, every test to evidence, and every gap to an owner.
Workflow
- Read the system's requirements (SRS/FR-xx, user stories) and RTM, plus existing tests in the owning repository (unit, integration, E2E, smoke).
- Run the existing suites when they are local and safe; record the command, date, and pass/fail counts as evidence. Never claim a run you did not do.
- Write the test strategy: levels, scope per level, environments and data,
tools, entry/exit criteria, defect severity and triage rules — base it on
templates/development-cycle/test-strategy.mdortemplates/positions/qa-test-engineer/quality-assurance-plan.md. - Write TC-xx cases (precondition, steps, expected result, linked FR-xx,
status, evidence) and a UAT script for business testers. For new work,
check ADR-0004 TDD+SDD: a
specs/<NNN>-<slug>/spec.mdwithAC-##scenarios, each linked to a test, and a red/green log (main-only repos: local red run, red and green pushed together). Seereferences/tdd-sdd-evidence.md. - Record defects with
templates/development-cycle/defect-record.mdand update the RTM status column throughbusiness-analysis. - For any user-facing screen, run the UI quality gate in
references/ui-quality-gate.mdon the rendered app. It covers readability, menu order, Thai copy, and information density and financial data.- Follow its section 0 procedure: review every touched page and its sibling pages at 375 and 1440 (plus 320, 768 and 1024 for layout changes).
- Capture with
scripts/ui_review.mjs, then look at every screenshot slice. It expands an inner app-shell scroller so the whole page is captured. Before a release, add WebKit, Firefox and phone emulation (--browser,--device), the visual diff against the approved baseline (--baseline), axe-core accessibility, and mobile Core Web Vitals (--perf mobile). See gate section 5 andreferences/browsers-and-tools.md. - Log each finding as a defect.
- Sign off the reviewed commit with
scripts/ui_signoff.py. Add--promote-baselineto a pass so it becomes the next visual baseline. - Capture the live URL again after deploy.
- Verify analytics before release: run checks 1–7 of the instrumentation
verification in
templates/sdlc/kpi-and-instrumentation-plan.md— every event fires once per real action, counts reconcile with the system of record, no personal data in payloads, dashboards render, alerts fire, baselines captured or a dated action recorded, and no analytics before consent where consent is the lawful basis. Record evidence per check. Checks 1–5 and 7 must pass before G10; only check 6 can be waived with a dated action. - For staged rollouts, confirm each stage's guardrail KPIs and rollback
triggers in
templates/sdlc/launch-gtm-plan.mdsection 8 match the runbook and the go-live checklist. - Check release readiness against
templates/development-cycle/quality-gate-pack.md. - After release, treat Sentry error issues, incident actions and failed
instrumentation as test work: a reproducing test first, filed as one
backlog task per architecture-docs
docs/lifecycle/OUTCOME-REVIEW-TO-BACKLOG.md(tasks-api, D2).
Decision rules
- A bug fix without a failing test that reproduced it first is incomplete unless the spec records an approved exception.
- Coverage gate threshold = measured coverage rounded down; never lower it without an owner-approved exception.
- Distinguish developer retest, automated tests, client UAT, and business acceptance; only the client signs acceptance.
- Untested or blocked cases stay visible with a reason; never drop them.
- Production data or real payments in tests → stop for explicit approval.
- An A/B test result with a sample ratio mismatch (chi-square p < 0.001) or broken events is invalid: do not analyse it, record a deviation in the EXP card run record, raise a defect for broken instrumentation, and rerun.
- Passing tests, overflow checks and agent summaries are not a UI review. Only a
look at the rendered screenshots is, recorded with
ui_signoff.py. ui_signoff.pyposts the GitHub commit statusui-review. For pull requests that touch no UI files, useui_review_status.py. Where a branch rule requires the status, every pull request needs one of the two.- Logged-in pages:
scripts/ui_login.mjssaves a session (mode 600, outside any repo). Pass it toui_review.mjsandui_states.mjswith--storage-state. scripts/ui_review_gate.pyis a PreToolUse hook. It blocksvercel --prod,gh pr mergeandgit pushto the default branch for unsigned UI changes. A local merge followed by a push is gated the same way.UI_REVIEW_GATE=offdisables it.
Handoff
Report suites run with results, TC coverage of priority requirements, open
defects by severity, UAT status, instrumentation check results, the red/green log status per
AC, the scorecard level (app_goal_scorecard.py) where it applies,
exit-criteria verdict, and next action.
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.

