agentleFS
bookchaowalitbookchaowalit/platform-agent-skills/qa-testing/SKILL.md

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

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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the system's requirements (SRS/FR-xx, user stories) and RTM, plus existing tests in the owning repository (unit, integration, E2E, …

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    Run the existing suites when they are local and safe.

    line 15
  3. Very specific:

    Write the test strategy: levels, scope per level, environments and data, tools, entry/exit criteria, defect severity and triage rules — …

    line 17
  4. Distinctive:

    Write TC-xx cases (precondition, steps, expected result, linked FR-xx, status, evidence) and a UAT script for business testers.

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    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).

    line 32
  6. Very specific:

    Before a release, add WebKit, Firefox and phone emulation (--browser, --device), the visual diff against the approved baseline …

    line 36
  7. Very specific:

    Verify analytics before release: run checks 1–7 of the instrumentation verification in templates/sdlc/kpi-and-instrumentation-plan.md — …

    line 44
  8. Very specific:

    Check release readiness against templates/development-cycle/quality-gate-pack.md.

    line 55
  9. Very specific:

    After release, treat Sentry error issues, incident actions and failed instrumentation as test work: a reproducing test first, filed as one …

    line 56

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

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

  1. Read the system's requirements (SRS/FR-xx, user stories) and RTM, plus existing tests in the owning repository (unit, integration, E2E, smoke).
  2. 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.
  3. 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.md or templates/positions/qa-test-engineer/quality-assurance-plan.md.
  4. 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.md with AC-## scenarios, each linked to a test, and a red/green log (main-only repos: local red run, red and green pushed together). See references/tdd-sdd-evidence.md.
  5. Record defects with templates/development-cycle/defect-record.md and update the RTM status column through business-analysis.
  6. For any user-facing screen, run the UI quality gate in references/ui-quality-gate.md on 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 and references/browsers-and-tools.md.
    • Log each finding as a defect.
    • Sign off the reviewed commit with scripts/ui_signoff.py. Add --promote-baseline to a pass so it becomes the next visual baseline.
    • Capture the live URL again after deploy.
  7. 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.
  8. For staged rollouts, confirm each stage's guardrail KPIs and rollback triggers in templates/sdlc/launch-gtm-plan.md section 8 match the runbook and the go-live checklist.
  9. Check release readiness against templates/development-cycle/quality-gate-pack.md.
  10. 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.py posts the GitHub commit status ui-review. For pull requests that touch no UI files, use ui_review_status.py. Where a branch rule requires the status, every pull request needs one of the two.
  • Logged-in pages: scripts/ui_login.mjs saves a session (mode 600, outside any repo). Pass it to ui_review.mjs and ui_states.mjs with --storage-state.
  • scripts/ui_review_gate.py is a PreToolUse hook. It blocks vercel --prod, gh pr merge and git push to the default branch for unsigned UI changes. A local merge followed by a push is gated the same way. UI_REVIEW_GATE=off disables 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.

Download now (ZIP)

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.