risk-based-testing
Skill524 starsChanged 35 days agoMITView on GitHub
Focus testing effort on highest-risk areas using risk assessment and prioritization. Use when planning test strategy, allocating testing resources, or making coverage decisions.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- petrkindlmann/qa-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- sb-dev/narrative-production-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- petrkindlmann/qa-skills★ 209same name
- sb-dev/narrative-production-skills★ 2same 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 repository129 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .claude/commands/monitoring/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- aqe-plan-qualitySkill
- aqe-plan-workSkill
- aqe-researchSkill
- aqe-review-qualitySkill
- aqe-rufloSkill
- aqe-test-changeSkill
- rufloSkill
- a11y-allySkill
- accessibility-testingSkill
- AgentDB Advanced FeaturesSkill
- AgentDB Learning PluginsSkill
- AgentDB Memory PatternsSkill
- AgentDB Performance OptimizationSkill
- AgentDB Vector SearchSkill
- agentic-quality-engineeringSkill
- api-testing-patternsSkill
- browserSkill
- brutal-honesty-reviewSkill
- bug-reporting-excellenceSkill
- chaos-engineering-resilienceSkill
- cicd-pipeline-qe-orchestratorSkill
- code-review-qualitySkill
- compatibility-testingSkill
- compliance-testingSkill
- consultancy-practicesSkill
- context-driven-testingSkill
- contract-testingSkill
- coverage-drop-investigatorSkill
- coverage-guardSkill
- database-testingSkill
- debug-loopSkill
- e2e-flow-verifierSkill
- enterprise-integration-testingSkill
- exploratory-testing-advancedSkill
- flow-nexus-neuralSkill
- flow-nexus-platformSkill
- flow-nexus-swarmSkill
- freeze-testsSkill
- github-code-reviewSkill
- github-multi-repoSkill
- github-project-managementSkill
- github-release-managementSkill
- github-workflow-automationSkill
- holistic-testing-pactSkill
- Hooks AutomationSkill
- iterative-loopSkill
- localization-testingSkill
- middleware-testing-patternsSkill
- mobile-testingSkill
- mutation-testingSkill
- n8n-expression-testingSkill
- n8n-integration-testing-patternsSkill
- n8n-security-testingSkill
- n8n-trigger-testing-strategiesSkill
- n8n-workflow-testing-fundamentalsSkill
- no-skipSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 24
When planning tests or allocating testing resources:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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
Risk-Based Testing
<default_to_action> When planning tests or allocating testing resources:
- IDENTIFY risks per component (use 1-5 scale for probability and impact)
- PRIORITIZE: Critical (20+) → High (12-19) → Medium (6-11) → Low (1-5)
- ALLOCATE effort: 60% critical, 25% high, 10% medium, 5% low
- REASSESS continuously: Production incidents raise risk; stable code lowers it </default_to_action>
Quick Reference Card
When to Use
- Planning sprint/release test strategy
- Deciding what to automate first
- Allocating limited testing time
- Justifying test coverage decisions
Effort Allocation by Risk Score
| Score | Priority | Effort | Action |
| 20-25 | Critical | 60% | Comprehensive testing, multiple techniques |
| 12-19 | High | 25% | Thorough testing, automation priority |
| 6-11 | Medium | 10% | Standard testing, basic automation |
| 1-5 | Low | 5% | Smoke test, exploratory only |
Apply Test Depth by Risk
await Task("Risk-Based Test Generation", {
critical: {
features: ['checkout', 'payment'],
depth: 'comprehensive',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration', 'e2e', 'performance', 'security']
},
high: {
features: ['auth', 'user-profile'],
depth: 'thorough',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration', 'e2e']
},
medium: {
features: ['search', 'notifications'],
depth: 'standard',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration']
},
low: {
features: ['admin-panel', 'settings'],
depth: 'smoke',
techniques: ['smoke-tests']
}
}, "qe-test-generator");Step 3: Reassess Dynamically
// Production incident increases risk
await Task("Update Risk Score", {
feature: 'search',
event: 'production-incident',
previousRisk: 9,
newProbability: 5, // Increased due to incident
newRisk: 15 // Now HIGH priority
}, "qe-regression-risk-analyzer");ML-Enhanced Risk Analysis
// Agent predicts risk using historical data
const riskAnalysis = await Task("ML Risk Analysis", {
codeChanges: changedFiles,
historicalBugs: bugDatabase,
prediction: {
model: 'gradient-boosting',
factors: ['complexity', 'change-frequency', 'author-experience', 'file-age']
}
}, "qe-regression-risk-analyzer");
// Output: 95% accuracy risk prediction per fileAgent Coordination Hints
Memory Namespace
aqe/risk-based/
├── risk-scores/* - Current risk assessments
├── historical-bugs/* - Bug patterns by area
├── production-data/* - Incident data for risk
└── coverage-map/* - Test depth by risk levelFleet Coordination
const riskFleet = await FleetManager.coordinate({
strategy: 'risk-based-testing',
agents: [
'qe-regression-risk-analyzer', // Risk scoring
'qe-test-generator', // Risk-appropriate tests
'qe-production-intelligence', // Production feedback
'qe-quality-gate' // Risk-based gates
],
topology: 'sequential'
});Integration with CI/CD
# Risk-based test selection in pipeline
- name: Risk Analysis
run: aqe risk-analyze --changes ${{ github.event.pull_request.files }}
- name: Run Critical Tests
if: risk.critical > 0
run: npm run test:critical
- name: Run High Tests
if: risk.high > 0
run: npm run test:high
- name: Skip Low Risk
if: risk.low_only
run: npm run test:smokeRelated Skills
- agentic-quality-engineering - Risk-aware agents
- context-driven-testing - Context affects risk
- regression-testing - Risk-based regression selection
- shift-right-testing - Production informs risk
Remember
With Agents: Agents calculate risk using ML on historical data, select risk-appropriate tests, and adjust scores from production feedback. Use agents to maintain dynamic risk profiles at scale.
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.

