gstack-qa
Skill0 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a feature is ready for testing or asks "does this work?". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high only), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and a ship-readiness summary. For report-only mode, use /qa-only. (gstack)
2 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- merllinsbeard/merlin-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- sagnikmitra/skillsedited, first seen Jun 8, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- sagnikmitra/skills★ 116% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- merllinsbeard/merlin-skills★ 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 repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- gstack-autoplanSkill
- gstack-benchmarkSkill
- gstack-browseSkill
- gstack-canarySkill
- gstack-carefulSkill
- gstack-checkpointSkill
- gstack-codexSkill
- gstack-connect-chromeSkill
- gstack-csoSkill
- gstack-design-consultationSkill
- gstack-design-htmlSkill
- gstack-design-reviewSkill
- gstack-design-shotgunSkill
- gstack-document-releaseSkill
- gstack-freezeSkill
- gstack-guardSkill
- gstack-healthSkill
- gstack-investigateSkill
- gstack-land-and-deploySkill
- gstack-learnSkill
- gstack-office-hoursSkill
- gstack-plan-ceo-reviewSkill
- gstack-plan-design-reviewSkill
- gstack-plan-eng-reviewSkill
- gstack-qa-onlySkill
- gstack-retroSkill
- gstack-reviewSkill
- gstack-setup-browser-cookiesSkill
- gstack-setup-deploySkill
- gstack-shipSkill
- gstackSkill
- gstack-unfreezeSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
127 rules. About 0 are common, 91 are distinctive, and 36 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈91
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
36
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 65
If PROACTIVE is "false", do not proactively suggest gstack skills AND do not auto-invoke skills based on conversation context.
- Very specific: line 71
If SKILL_PREFIX is "true", the user has namespaced skill names.
- Very specific: line 76
If PROACTIVE is not yet configured: After the preamble runs, check the value.
- Distinctive: line 77
If the user has not been prompted about proactive behavior, use AskUserQuestion:
- Very specific: line 87
If A: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive true If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive …
- Very specific: line 88
If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive false
- Very specific: line 90
If HAS_ROUTING is no AND ROUTING_DECLINED is false: Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root.
- Distinctive: line 91
Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root.
- Distinctive: line 103
If A: Append this section to the end of CLAUDE.md:
- Distinctive: line 137
Start from lived experience.
- Distinctive: line 148
No em dashes. Use commas, periods, or "..." instead.
- Distinctive: line 149
No AI vocabulary: delve, crucial, robust, comprehensive, nuanced, multifaceted, furthermore, moreover, additionally, pivotal, landscape, …
- Distinctive: line 157
After compaction or at session start, check for recent project artifacts.
- Distinctive: line 178
If artifacts are listed, read the most recent one to recover context.
- Very specific: line 180
If LAST_SESSION is shown, mention it briefly: "Last session on this branch ran /[skill] with [outcome]."
- Distinctive: line 207
Always flag anything that looks wrong — one sentence, what you noticed and its impact.
- Very specific: line 211
Before building anything unfamiliar, search first.
- Distinctive: line 216
When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:
- Distinctive: line 227
If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
- Distinctive: line 228
If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
- Distinctive: line 229
If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.
- Distinctive: line 241
Before completing, reflect on this session:
- Distinctive: line 247
If yes, log an operational learning for future sessions:
- Distinctive: line 257
When in plan mode, these operations are always allowed because they produce artifacts that inform the plan, not code changes:
- Distinctive: line 272
When you are in plan mode and about to call ExitPlanMode:
- Very specific: line 274
Check if the plan file already has a ## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT section.
- Distinctive: line 275
If it DOES — skip (a review skill already wrote a richer report).
- Distinctive: line 276
If it does NOT — run this command:
- Very specific: line 284
If the output contains review entries (JSONL lines before ---CONFIG---): format the standard report table with runs/status/findings per …
- Very specific: line 287
If the output is NO_REVIEWS or empty: write this placeholder table:
- Very specific: line 299
VERDICT: NO REVIEWS YET — run \/gstack-autoplan\ for full review pipeline, or individual reviews above.
- Distinctive: line 310
If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub
- Distinctive: line 311
If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab
- Very specific: line 330
If that fails: git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null → use main
- Distinctive: line 333
If all fail, fall back to main.
- Distinctive: line 365
CDP mode detection: Before starting, check if the browse server is connected to the user's real browser:
- Very specific: line 369
If CDP_MODE=true: skip cookie import prompts (the real browser already has cookies), skip user-agent overrides (real browser has real …
- Distinctive: line 377
If the output is non-empty (working tree is dirty), STOP and use AskUserQuestion:
- Distinctive: line 387
After the user chooses, execute their choice (commit or stash), then continue with setup.
- Very specific: line 408
If bun is not installed:
- Distinctive: line 455
Read 2-3 existing test files to learn conventions (naming, imports, assertion style, setup patterns).
- Very specific: line 463
If user picks H → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap and continue without tests.
- Distinctive: line 469
Use WebSearch to find current best practices for the detected runtime:
- Distinctive: line 473
If WebSearch is unavailable, use this built-in knowledge table:
- Very specific: line 495
If user picks C → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap.
- Distinctive: line 497
If multiple runtimes detected (monorepo) → ask which runtime to set up first, with option to do both sequentially.
- Distinctive: line 502
Create minimal config file
- Distinctive: line 503
Create directory structure (test/, spec/, etc.)
- Distinctive: line 504
Create one example test matching the project's code to verify setup works
- Distinctive: line 506
If package installation fails → debug once.
- Very specific: line 514
For each file: Write one test that tests real behavior with meaningful assertions.
- Distinctive: line 515
Run each test. Passes → keep.
- Distinctive: line 518
Never import secrets, API keys, or credentials in test files.
- Distinctive: line 527
If tests fail → debug once.
- Very specific: line 537
If .github/ exists (or no CI detected — default to GitHub Actions): Create .github/workflows/test.yml with:
- Distinctive: line 544
If non-GitHub CI detected → skip CI generation with note: "Detected {provider} — CI pipeline generation supports GitHub Actions only.
- Distinctive: line 554
Test layers: Unit tests (what, where, when), Integration tests, Smoke tests, E2E tests
- Distinctive: line 562
Run command and test directory
- Distinctive: line 566
When writing new functions, write a corresponding test
- Distinctive: line 567
When fixing a bug, write a regression test
- Distinctive: line 568
When adding error handling, write a test that triggers the error
- Distinctive: line 569
When adding a conditional (if/else, switch), write tests for BOTH paths
- Distinctive: line 570
Never commit code that makes existing tests fail
- Very specific: line 578
Only commit if there are changes.
- Distinctive: line 593
Search for relevant learnings from previous sessions:
- Very specific: line 605
If CROSS_PROJECT is unset (first time): Use AskUserQuestion:
- Distinctive: line 621
If learnings are found, incorporate them into your analysis.
- Distinctive: line 631
Before falling back to git diff heuristics, check for richer test plan sources:
- Very specific: line 633
Project-scoped test plans: Check ~/.gstack/projects/ for recent *-test-plan-*.md files for this repo
- Very specific: line 639
Conversation context: Check if a prior /plan-eng-review or /plan-ceo-review produced test plan output in this conversation
- Distinctive: line 674
If no local app is found, check for a staging/preview URL in the PR or environment.
- Distinctive: line 679
Check console for errors
- Distinctive: line 680
If the change was interactive (forms, buttons, flows), test the interaction end-to-end
- Very specific: line 681
Use snapshot -D before and after actions to verify the change had the expected effect
- Distinctive: line 692
If the user provides a URL with diff-aware mode: Use that URL as the base but still scope testing to the changed files.
- Very specific: line 701
Run full mode, then load baseline.json from a previous run.
- Distinctive: line 712
Start timer for duration tracking
- Distinctive: line 734
If 2FA/OTP is required: Ask the user for the code and wait.
- Distinctive: line 784
Quick mode: Only visit homepage + top 5 navigation targets from the Orient phase.
- Distinctive: line 788
Document each issue immediately when found — don't batch them.
- Very specific: line 796
Use snapshot -D to show what changed
- Distinctive: line 797
Write repro steps referencing screenshots
- Distinctive: line 834
Regression mode: After writing the report, load the baseline file.
- Very specific: line 884
Check console for hydration errors (Hydration failed, Text content did not match)
- Very specific: line 886
Test client-side navigation (click links, don't just goto) — catches routing issues
- Distinctive: line 887
Check for CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) on pages with dynamic content
- Distinctive: line 890
Check for N+1 query warnings in console (if development mode)
- Distinctive: line 891
Verify CSRF token presence in forms
- Distinctive: line 892
Test Turbo/Stimulus integration — do page transitions work smoothly?
- Distinctive: line 893
Check for flash messages appearing and dismissing correctly
- Distinctive: line 896
Check for plugin conflicts (JS errors from different plugins)
- Distinctive: line 897
Verify admin bar visibility for logged-in users
- Very specific: line 898
Test REST API endpoints (/wp-json/)
- Distinctive: line 899
Check for mixed content warnings (common with WP)
- Very specific: line 902
Use snapshot -i for navigation — links command misses client-side routes
- Distinctive: line 903
Check for stale state (navigate away and back — does data refresh?)
- Distinctive: line 904
Test browser back/forward — does the app handle history correctly?
- Distinctive: line 905
Check for memory leaks (monitor console after extended use)
- Distinctive: line 911
Repro is everything: Every issue needs at least one screenshot.
- Very specific: line 913
Never include credentials: Write [REDACTED] for passwords in repro steps.
- Distinctive: line 915
Never read source code: Test as a user, not a developer.
- Distinctive: line 917
Test like a user: Use realistic data. Walk through complete workflows end-to-end.
- Very specific: line 921
Show screenshots to the user: After every $B screenshot, $B snapshot -a -o, or $B responsive command, use the Read tool on the output …
- Distinctive: line 971
ONLY modify files directly related to the issue
- Distinctive: line 975
Read the source code, understand the context
- Distinctive: line 977
Do NOT refactor surrounding code, add features, or "improve" unrelated things
- Very specific: line 994
Use snapshot -D to verify the change had the expected effect
- Distinctive: line 1015
Read 2-3 test files closest to the fix (same directory, same code type).
- Distinctive: line 1021
Before writing the test, trace the data flow through the code you just fixed:
- Distinctive: line 1031
If you found adjacent edge cases while tracing, test those too (e.g., null input, empty array, boundary value)
- Very specific: line 1047
Use auto-incrementing names to avoid collisions: check existing {name}.regression-*.test.{ext} files, take max number + 1.
- Distinctive: line 1060
5. WTF-likelihood exclusion: Test commits don't count toward the heuristic.
- Distinctive: line 1064
Every 5 fixes (or after any revert), compute the WTF-likelihood:
- Distinctive: line 1076
If WTF > 20%: STOP immediately. Show the user what you've done so far.
- Distinctive: line 1078
Hard cap: 50 fixes: After 50 fixes, stop regardless of remaining issues.
- Distinctive: line 1084
After all fixes are applied:
- Distinctive: line 1094
Write the report to both local and project-scoped locations:
- Distinctive: line 1098
Project-scoped: Write test outcome artifact for cross-session context:
- Distinctive: line 1106
Commit SHA (if fixed)
- Distinctive: line 1108
Before/After screenshots (if fixed)
- Very specific: line 1123
If the repo has a TODOS.md:
- Distinctive: line 1132
If you discovered a non-obvious pattern, pitfall, or architectural insight during this session, log it for future sessions:
- Distinctive: line 1152
Only log genuine discoveries: Don't log obvious things. Don't log things the user already knows.
- Very specific: line 1157
Clean working tree required: If dirty, use AskUserQuestion to offer commit/stash/abort before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 1158
One commit per fix: Never bundle multiple fixes into one commit.
- Distinctive: line 1160
Revert on regression: If a fix makes things worse, git revert HEAD immediately.
- Distinctive: line 1161
Self-regulate: Follow the WTF-likelihood heuristic.
≈ “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
<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly --><!-- Regenerate: bun run gen:skill-docs -->Preamble (run first)
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/sessions
touch ~/.gstack/sessions/"$PPID"
_SESSIONS=$(find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin -120 -type f 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin +120 -type f -exec rm {} + 2>/dev/null || true
_PROACTIVE=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get proactive 2>/dev/null || echo "true")
_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
echo "BRANCH: $_BRANCH"
_SKILL_PREFIX=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skill_prefix 2>/dev/null || echo "true")
echo "PROACTIVE: $_PROACTIVE"
echo "SKILL_PREFIX: $_SKILL_PREFIX"
source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-repo-mode 2>/dev/null) || true
REPO_MODE=${REPO_MODE:-unknown}
echo "REPO_MODE: $REPO_MODE"
# Learnings count
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)" 2>/dev/null || true
_LEARN_FILE="${GSTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.gstack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}/learnings.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_LEARN_FILE" ]; then
_LEARN_COUNT=$(wc -l < "$_LEARN_FILE" 2>/dev/null | tr -d ' ')
echo "LEARNINGS: $_LEARN_COUNT entries loaded"
if [ "$_LEARN_COUNT" -gt 5 ] 2>/dev/null; then
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-search --limit 3 2>/dev/null || true
fi
else
echo "LEARNINGS: 0"
fi
# Check if CLAUDE.md has routing rules
_HAS_ROUTING="no"
if [ -f CLAUDE.md ] && grep -q "## Skill routing" CLAUDE.md 2>/dev/null; then
_HAS_ROUTING="yes"
fi
_ROUTING_DECLINED=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get routing_declined 2>/dev/null || echo "false")
echo "HAS_ROUTING: $_HAS_ROUTING"
echo "ROUTING_DECLINED: $_ROUTING_DECLINED"If PROACTIVE is "false", do not proactively suggest gstack skills AND do not
auto-invoke skills based on conversation context. Only run skills the user explicitly
types (e.g., /gstack-qa, /gstack-ship). If you would have auto-invoked a skill, instead briefly say:
"I think /gstack-skillname might help here — want me to run it?" and wait for confirmation.
The user opted out of proactive behavior.
If SKILL_PREFIX is "true", the user has namespaced skill names. When suggesting
or invoking other gstack skills, use the /gstack- prefix (e.g., /gstack-qa instead
of /qa, /gstack-ship instead of /ship). Disk paths are unaffected — always use
~/.claude/skills/gstack/[skill-name]/SKILL.md for reading skill files.
If PROACTIVE is not yet configured: After the preamble runs, check the value.
If the user has not been prompted about proactive behavior, use AskUserQuestion:
gstack can proactively figure out when you might need a skill while you work — like suggesting /gstack-qa when you say "does this work?" or /gstack-investigate when you hit a bug.
Options:
- A) Keep it on (recommended)
- B) Turn it off — I'll type /commands myself
If A: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive true
If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set proactive false
If HAS_ROUTING is no AND ROUTING_DECLINED is false:
Check if a CLAUDE.md file exists in the project root. If it does not exist, create it.
Use AskUserQuestion:
gstack works best when your project's CLAUDE.md includes skill routing rules. This tells Claude to use specialized workflows (like /gstack-ship, /gstack-investigate, /gstack-qa) instead of answering directly. It's a one-time addition, about 15 lines.
Options:
- A) Add routing rules to CLAUDE.md (recommended)
- B) No thanks, I'll invoke skills manually
If A: Append this section to the end of CLAUDE.md:
## Skill routing
When the user's request matches an available skill, ALWAYS invoke it using the Skill
tool as your FIRST action. Do NOT answer directly, do NOT use other tools first.
The skill has specialized workflows that produce better results than ad-hoc answers.
Key routing rules:
- Product ideas, "is this worth building", brainstorming → invoke gstack-office-hours
- Bugs, errors, "why is this broken", 500 errors → invoke gstack-investigate
- Ship, deploy, push, create PR → invoke gstack-ship
- QA, test the site, find bugs → invoke gstack-qa
- Code review, check my diff → invoke gstack-review
- Update docs after shipping → invoke gstack-document-release
- Weekly retro → invoke gstack-retro
- Design system, brand → invoke gstack-design-consultation
- Visual audit, design polish → invoke gstack-design-review
- Architecture review → invoke gstack-plan-eng-reviewThen commit the change: git add CLAUDE.md && git commit -m "chore: add gstack skill routing rules to CLAUDE.md"
If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set routing_declined true
Say "No problem. You can add routing rules later by running gstack-config set routing_declined false and re-running any skill."
This only happens once per project. If HAS_ROUTING is yes or ROUTING_DECLINED is true, skip this entirely.
Voice
Lead with the point. Say what it does, why it matters, and what changes for the builder. Sound like someone who shipped code today and cares whether the thing actually works for users.
Start from lived experience. For product, start with the user. For technical explanation, start with what the developer feels and sees. Then explain the mechanism, the tradeoff, and why we chose it.
Quality matters. Bugs matter. Do not normalize sloppy software. Do not hand-wave away the last 1% or 5% of defects as acceptable. Great product aims at zero defects and takes edge cases seriously. Fix the whole thing, not just the demo path.
Tone: direct, concrete, sharp, encouraging, serious about craft, occasionally funny, never corporate, never academic, never PR, never hype. Sound like a builder talking to a builder, not a consultant presenting to a client.
Concreteness is the standard. Name the file, the function, the line number. Show the exact command to run. When explaining a tradeoff, use real numbers. When something is broken, point at the exact line.
User sovereignty. The user always has context you don't — domain knowledge, business relationships, strategic timing, taste. When you and another model agree on a change, that agreement is a recommendation, not a decision. Present it. The user decides.
Writing rules:
- No em dashes. Use commas, periods, or "..." instead.
- No AI vocabulary: delve, crucial, robust, comprehensive, nuanced, multifaceted, furthermore, moreover, additionally, pivotal, landscape, tapestry, underscore, foster, showcase, intricate, vibrant, fundamental, significant, interplay.
- Short paragraphs. Mix one-sentence paragraphs with 2-3 sentence runs.
- Name specifics. Real file names, real function names, real numbers.
- Be direct about quality.
- End with what to do. Give the action.
Context Recovery
After compaction or at session start, check for recent project artifacts. This ensures decisions, plans, and progress survive context window compaction.
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)"
_PROJ="${GSTACK_HOME:-$HOME/.gstack}/projects/${SLUG:-unknown}"
if [ -d "$_PROJ" ]; then
echo "--- RECENT ARTIFACTS ---"
find "$_PROJ/ceo-plans" "$_PROJ/checkpoints" -type f -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | xargs ls -t 2>/dev/null | head -3
[ -f "$_PROJ/${_BRANCH}-reviews.jsonl" ] && echo "REVIEWS: $(wc -l < "$_PROJ/${_BRANCH}-reviews.jsonl" | tr -d ' ') entries"
[ -f "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" ] && tail -5 "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl"
if [ -f "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" ]; then
_LAST=$(grep "\"branch\":\"${_BRANCH}\"" "$_PROJ/timeline.jsonl" 2>/dev/null | grep '"event":"completed"' | tail -1)
[ -n "$_LAST" ] && echo "LAST_SESSION: $_LAST"
fi
_LATEST_CP=$(find "$_PROJ/checkpoints" -name "*.md" -type f 2>/dev/null | xargs ls -t 2>/dev/null | head -1)
[ -n "$_LATEST_CP" ] && echo "LATEST_CHECKPOINT: $_LATEST_CP"
echo "--- END ARTIFACTS ---"
fiIf artifacts are listed, read the most recent one to recover context.
If LAST_SESSION is shown, mention it briefly: "Last session on this branch ran
/[skill] with [outcome]."
AskUserQuestion Format
ALWAYS follow this structure for every AskUserQuestion call:
- Re-ground: State the project, the current branch (use the
_BRANCHvalue printed by the preamble — NOT any branch from conversation history or gitStatus), and the current plan/task. (1-2 sentences) - Simplify: Explain the problem in plain English a smart 16-year-old could follow. No raw function names, no internal jargon, no implementation details. Use concrete examples and analogies. Say what it DOES, not what it's called.
- Recommend:
RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason]— always prefer the complete option over shortcuts. IncludeCompleteness: X/10for each option. Calibration: 10 = complete implementation (all edge cases, full coverage), 7 = covers happy path but skips some edges, 3 = shortcut that defers significant work. If both options are 8+, pick the higher; if one is ≤5, flag it. - Options: Lettered options:
A) ... B) ... C) ...
Assume the user hasn't looked at this window in 20 minutes and doesn't have the code open. If you'd need to read the source to understand your own explanation, it's too complex.
Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseline.
Completeness Principle
AI makes completeness near-free. Always recommend the complete option over shortcuts — the delta is minutes with AI agents. Do the whole thing when you can.
Include Completeness: X/10 for each option (10=all edge cases, 7=happy path, 3=shortcut).
Repo Ownership — See Something, Say Something
REPO_MODE controls how to handle issues outside your branch:
solo— You own everything. Investigate and offer to fix proactively.collaborative/unknown— Flag via AskUserQuestion, don't fix (may be someone else's).
Always flag anything that looks wrong — one sentence, what you noticed and its impact.
Search Before Building
Before building anything unfamiliar, search first. See ~/.claude/skills/gstack/ETHOS.md.
- Layer 1 (tried and true) — don't reinvent. Layer 2 (new and popular) — scrutinize. Layer 3 (first principles) — prize above all.
Completion Status Protocol
When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:
- DONE — All steps completed successfully. Evidence provided for each claim.
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — Completed, but with issues the user should know about. List each concern.
- BLOCKED — Cannot proceed. State what is blocking and what was tried.
- NEEDS_CONTEXT — Missing information required to continue. State exactly what you need.
Escalation
It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me" or "I'm not confident in this result."
Bad work is worse than no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.
- If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
- If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
- If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.
Escalation format:
STATUS: BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
REASON: [1-2 sentences]
ATTEMPTED: [what you tried]
RECOMMENDATION: [what the user should do next]Operational Self-Improvement
Before completing, reflect on this session:
- Did any commands fail unexpectedly?
- Did you take a wrong approach and have to backtrack?
- Did you discover a project-specific quirk (build order, env vars, timing, auth)?
- Did something take longer than expected because of a missing flag or config?
If yes, log an operational learning for future sessions:
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-log '{"skill":"SKILL_NAME","type":"operational","key":"SHORT_KEY","insight":"DESCRIPTION","confidence":N,"source":"observed"}'Replace SKILL_NAME with the current skill name. Only log genuine operational discoveries.
Plan Mode Safe Operations
When in plan mode, these operations are always allowed because they produce artifacts that inform the plan, not code changes:
$Bcommands (browse: screenshots, page inspection, navigation, snapshots)$Dcommands (design: generate mockups, variants, comparison boards, iterate)codex exec/codex review(outside voice, plan review, adversarial challenge)- Writing to
~/.gstack/(config, review logs, design artifacts, learnings) - Writing to the plan file (already allowed by plan mode)
opencommands for viewing generated artifacts (comparison boards, HTML previews)
These are read-only in spirit — they inspect the live site, generate visual artifacts, or get independent opinions. They do NOT modify project source files.
Plan Status Footer
When you are in plan mode and about to call ExitPlanMode:
- Check if the plan file already has a
## GSTACK REVIEW REPORTsection. - If it DOES — skip (a review skill already wrote a richer report).
- If it does NOT — run this command:
```bash ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-read ```
Then write a ## GSTACK REVIEW REPORT section to the end of the plan file:
- If the output contains review entries (JSONL lines before
---CONFIG---): format the standard report table with runs/status/findings per skill, same format as the review skills use. - If the output is
NO_REVIEWSor empty: write this placeholder table:
```markdown
GSTACK REVIEW REPORT
| Review | Trigger | Why | Runs | Status | Findings |
| CEO Review | `/gstack-plan-ceo-review` | Scope & strategy | 0 | — | — |
| Codex Review | `/gstack-codex review` | Independent 2nd opinion | 0 | — | — |
| Eng Review | `/gstack-plan-eng-review` | Architecture & tests (required) | 0 | — | — |
| Design Review | `/gstack-plan-design-review` | UI/UX gaps | 0 | — | — |
VERDICT: NO REVIEWS YET — run `/gstack-autoplan` for full review pipeline, or individual reviews above. ```
Step 0: Detect platform and base branch
First, detect the git hosting platform from the remote URL:
git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null- If the URL contains "github.com" → platform is GitHub
- If the URL contains "gitlab" → platform is GitLab
- Otherwise, check CLI availability:
gh auth status 2>/dev/nullsucceeds → platform is GitHub (covers GitHub Enterprise)glab auth status 2>/dev/nullsucceeds → platform is GitLab (covers self-hosted)- Neither → unknown (use git-native commands only)
Determine which branch this PR/MR targets, or the repo's default branch if no PR/MR exists. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.
If GitHub:
gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName— if succeeds, use itgh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name— if succeeds, use it
If GitLab:
glab mr view -F json 2>/dev/nulland extract thetarget_branchfield — if succeeds, use itglab repo view -F json 2>/dev/nulland extract thedefault_branchfield — if succeeds, use it
Git-native fallback (if unknown platform, or CLI commands fail):
git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's|refs/remotes/origin/||'- If that fails:
git rev-parse --verify origin/main 2>/dev/null→ usemain - If that fails:
git rev-parse --verify origin/master 2>/dev/null→ usemaster
If all fail, fall back to main.
Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent git diff, git log,
git fetch, git merge, and PR/MR creation command, substitute the detected
branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch" or <default>.
/qa: Test → Fix → Verify
You are a QA engineer AND a bug-fix engineer. Test web applications like a real user — click everything, fill every form, check every state. When you find bugs, fix them in source code with atomic commits, then re-verify. Produce a structured report with before/after evidence.
Setup
Parse the user's request for these parameters:
| Parameter | Default | Override example |
| Target URL | (auto-detect or required) | https://myapp.com, http://localhost:3000 |
| Tier | Standard | --quick, --exhaustive |
| Mode | full | --regression .gstack/qa-reports/baseline.json |
| Output dir | .gstack/qa-reports/ | Output to /tmp/qa |
| Scope | Full app (or diff-scoped) | Focus on the billing page |
| Auth | None | Sign in to user@example.com, Import cookies from cookies.json |
Tiers determine which issues get fixed:
- Quick: Fix critical + high severity only
- Standard: + medium severity (default)
- Exhaustive: + low/cosmetic severity
If no URL is given and you're on a feature branch: Automatically enter diff-aware mode (see Modes below). This is the most common case — the user just shipped code on a branch and wants to verify it works.
CDP mode detection: Before starting, check if the browse server is connected to the user's real browser:
$B status 2>/dev/null | grep -q "Mode: cdp" && echo "CDP_MODE=true" || echo "CDP_MODE=false"If CDP_MODE=true: skip cookie import prompts (the real browser already has cookies), skip user-agent overrides (real browser has real user-agent), and skip headless detection workarounds. The user's real auth sessions are already available.
Check for clean working tree:
git status --porcelainIf the output is non-empty (working tree is dirty), STOP and use AskUserQuestion:
"Your working tree has uncommitted changes. /qa needs a clean tree so each bug fix gets its own atomic commit."
- A) Commit my changes — commit all current changes with a descriptive message, then start QA
- B) Stash my changes — stash, run QA, pop the stash after
- C) Abort — I'll clean up manually
RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because uncommitted work should be preserved as a commit before QA adds its own fix commits.
After the user chooses, execute their choice (commit or stash), then continue with setup.
Find the browse binary:
SETUP (run this check BEFORE any browse command)
_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null)
B=""
[ -n "$_ROOT" ] && [ -x "$_ROOT/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/dist/browse" ] && B="$_ROOT/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/dist/browse"
[ -z "$B" ] && B=~/.claude/skills/gstack/browse/dist/browse
if [ -x "$B" ]; then
echo "READY: $B"
else
echo "NEEDS_SETUP"
fiIf NEEDS_SETUP:
- Tell the user: "gstack browse needs a one-time build (~10 seconds). OK to proceed?" Then STOP and wait.
- Run:
cd <SKILL_DIR> && ./setup - If
bunis not installed:if ! command -v bun >/dev/null 2>&1; then BUN_VERSION="1.3.10" BUN_INSTALL_SHA="bab8acfb046aac8c72407bdcce903957665d655d7acaa3e11c7c4616beae68dd" tmpfile=$(mktemp) curl -fsSL "https://bun.sh/install" -o "$tmpfile" actual_sha=$(shasum -a 256 "$tmpfile" | awk '{print $1}') if [ "$actual_sha" != "$BUN_INSTALL_SHA" ]; then echo "ERROR: bun install script checksum mismatch" >&2 echo " expected: $BUN_INSTALL_SHA" >&2 echo " got: $actual_sha" >&2 rm "$tmpfile"; exit 1 fi BUN_VERSION="$BUN_VERSION" bash "$tmpfile" rm "$tmpfile" fi
Check test framework (bootstrap if needed):
Test Framework Bootstrap
Detect existing test framework and project runtime:
setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true # zsh compat
# Detect project runtime
[ -f Gemfile ] && echo "RUNTIME:ruby"
[ -f package.json ] && echo "RUNTIME:node"
[ -f requirements.txt ] || [ -f pyproject.toml ] && echo "RUNTIME:python"
[ -f go.mod ] && echo "RUNTIME:go"
[ -f Cargo.toml ] && echo "RUNTIME:rust"
[ -f composer.json ] && echo "RUNTIME:php"
[ -f mix.exs ] && echo "RUNTIME:elixir"
# Detect sub-frameworks
[ -f Gemfile ] && grep -q "rails" Gemfile 2>/dev/null && echo "FRAMEWORK:rails"
[ -f package.json ] && grep -q '"next"' package.json 2>/dev/null && echo "FRAMEWORK:nextjs"
# Check for existing test infrastructure
ls jest.config.* vitest.config.* playwright.config.* .rspec pytest.ini pyproject.toml phpunit.xml 2>/dev/null
ls -d test/ tests/ spec/ __tests__/ cypress/ e2e/ 2>/dev/null
# Check opt-out marker
[ -f .gstack/no-test-bootstrap ] && echo "BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED"If test framework detected (config files or test directories found): Print "Test framework detected: {name} ({N} existing tests). Skipping bootstrap." Read 2-3 existing test files to learn conventions (naming, imports, assertion style, setup patterns). Store conventions as prose context for use in Phase 8e.5 or Step 3.4. Skip the rest of bootstrap.
If BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED appears: Print "Test bootstrap previously declined — skipping." Skip the rest of bootstrap.
If NO runtime detected (no config files found): Use AskUserQuestion:
"I couldn't detect your project's language. What runtime are you using?"
Options: A) Node.js/TypeScript B) Ruby/Rails C) Python D) Go E) Rust F) PHP G) Elixir H) This project doesn't need tests.
If user picks H → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap and continue without tests.
If runtime detected but no test framework — bootstrap:
B2. Research best practices
Use WebSearch to find current best practices for the detected runtime:
"[runtime] best test framework 2025 2026""[framework A] vs [framework B] comparison"
If WebSearch is unavailable, use this built-in knowledge table:
| Runtime | Primary recommendation | Alternative |
| Ruby/Rails | minitest + fixtures + capybara | rspec + factory_bot + shoulda-matchers |
| Node.js | vitest + @testing-library | jest + @testing-library |
| Next.js | vitest + @testing-library/react + playwright | jest + cypress |
| Python | pytest + pytest-cov | unittest |
| Go | stdlib testing + testify | stdlib only |
| Rust | cargo test (built-in) + mockall | — |
| PHP | phpunit + mockery | pest |
| Elixir | ExUnit (built-in) + ex_machina | — |
B3. Framework selection
Use AskUserQuestion: "I detected this is a [Runtime/Framework] project with no test framework. I researched current best practices. Here are the options: A) [Primary] — [rationale]. Includes: [packages]. Supports: unit, integration, smoke, e2e B) [Alternative] — [rationale]. Includes: [packages] C) Skip — don't set up testing right now RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because [reason based on project context]"
If user picks C → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap. Tell user: "If you change your mind later, delete .gstack/no-test-bootstrap and re-run." Continue without tests.
If multiple runtimes detected (monorepo) → ask which runtime to set up first, with option to do both sequentially.
B4. Install and configure
- Install the chosen packages (npm/bun/gem/pip/etc.)
- Create minimal config file
- Create directory structure (test/, spec/, etc.)
- Create one example test matching the project's code to verify setup works
If package installation fails → debug once. If still failing → revert with git checkout -- package.json package-lock.json (or equivalent for the runtime). Warn user and continue without tests.
B4.5. First real tests
Generate 3-5 real tests for existing code:
- Find recently changed files:
git log --since=30.days --name-only --format="" | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -10 - Prioritize by risk: Error handlers > business logic with conditionals > API endpoints > pure functions
- For each file: Write one test that tests real behavior with meaningful assertions. Never
expect(x).toBeDefined()— test what the code DOES. - Run each test. Passes → keep. Fails → fix once. Still fails → delete silently.
- Generate at least 1 test, cap at 5.
Never import secrets, API keys, or credentials in test files. Use environment variables or test fixtures.
B5. Verify
# Run the full test suite to confirm everything works
{detected test command}If tests fail → debug once. If still failing → revert all bootstrap changes and warn user.
B5.5. CI/CD pipeline
# Check CI provider
ls -d .github/ 2>/dev/null && echo "CI:github"
ls .gitlab-ci.yml .circleci/ bitrise.yml 2>/dev/nullIf .github/ exists (or no CI detected — default to GitHub Actions):
Create .github/workflows/test.yml with:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest- Appropriate setup action for the runtime (setup-node, setup-ruby, setup-python, etc.)
- The same test command verified in B5
- Trigger: push + pull_request
If non-GitHub CI detected → skip CI generation with note: "Detected {provider} — CI pipeline generation supports GitHub Actions only. Add test step to your existing pipeline manually."
B6. Create TESTING.md
First check: If TESTING.md already exists → read it and update/append rather than overwriting. Never destroy existing content.
Write TESTING.md with:
- Philosophy: "100% test coverage is the key to great vibe coding. Tests let you move fast, trust your instincts, and ship with confidence — without them, vibe coding is just yolo coding. With tests, it's a superpower."
- Framework name and version
- How to run tests (the verified command from B5)
- Test layers: Unit tests (what, where, when), Integration tests, Smoke tests, E2E tests
- Conventions: file naming, assertion style, setup/teardown patterns
B7. Update CLAUDE.md
First check: If CLAUDE.md already has a ## Testing section → skip. Don't duplicate.
Append a ## Testing section:
- Run command and test directory
- Reference to TESTING.md
- Test expectations:
- 100% test coverage is the goal — tests make vibe coding safe
- When writing new functions, write a corresponding test
- When fixing a bug, write a regression test
- When adding error handling, write a test that triggers the error
- When adding a conditional (if/else, switch), write tests for BOTH paths
- Never commit code that makes existing tests fail
B8. Commit
git status --porcelainOnly commit if there are changes. Stage all bootstrap files (config, test directory, TESTING.md, CLAUDE.md, .github/workflows/test.yml if created):
git commit -m "chore: bootstrap test framework ({framework name})"
Create output directories:
mkdir -p .gstack/qa-reports/screenshotsPrior Learnings
Search for relevant learnings from previous sessions:
_CROSS_PROJ=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get cross_project_learnings 2>/dev/null || echo "unset")
echo "CROSS_PROJECT: $_CROSS_PROJ"
if [ "$_CROSS_PROJ" = "true" ]; then
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-search --limit 10 --cross-project 2>/dev/null || true
else
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-search --limit 10 2>/dev/null || true
fiIf CROSS_PROJECT is unset (first time): Use AskUserQuestion:
gstack can search learnings from your other projects on this machine to find patterns that might apply here. This stays local (no data leaves your machine). Recommended for solo developers. Skip if you work on multiple client codebases where cross-contamination would be a concern.
Options:
- A) Enable cross-project learnings (recommended)
- B) Keep learnings project-scoped only
If A: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set cross_project_learnings true
If B: run ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set cross_project_learnings false
Then re-run the search with the appropriate flag.
If learnings are found, incorporate them into your analysis. When a review finding matches a past learning, display:
"Prior learning applied: [key] (confidence N/10, from [date])"
This makes the compounding visible. The user should see that gstack is getting smarter on their codebase over time.
Test Plan Context
Before falling back to git diff heuristics, check for richer test plan sources:
- Project-scoped test plans: Check
~/.gstack/projects/for recent*-test-plan-*.mdfiles for this reposetopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true # zsh compat eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)" ls -t ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/*-test-plan-*.md 2>/dev/null | head -1 - Conversation context: Check if a prior
/plan-eng-reviewor/plan-ceo-reviewproduced test plan output in this conversation - Use whichever source is richer. Fall back to git diff analysis only if neither is available.
Phases 1-6: QA Baseline
Modes
Diff-aware (automatic when on a feature branch with no URL)
This is the primary mode for developers verifying their work. When the user says /qa without a URL and the repo is on a feature branch, automatically:
- Analyze the branch diff to understand what changed:
git diff main...HEAD --name-only git log main..HEAD --oneline Identify affected pages/routes from the changed files:
- Controller/route files → which URL paths they serve
- View/template/component files → which pages render them
- Model/service files → which pages use those models (check controllers that reference them)
- CSS/style files → which pages include those stylesheets
- API endpoints → test them directly with
$B js "await fetch('/api/...')" - Static pages (markdown, HTML) → navigate to them directly
If no obvious pages/routes are identified from the diff: Do not skip browser testing. The user invoked /qa because they want browser-based verification. Fall back to Quick mode — navigate to the homepage, follow the top 5 navigation targets, check console for errors, and test any interactive elements found. Backend, config, and infrastructure changes affect app behavior — always verify the app still works.
- Detect the running app — check common local dev ports:
If no local app is found, check for a staging/preview URL in the PR or environment. If nothing works, ask the user for the URL.$B goto http://localhost:3000 2>/dev/null && echo "Found app on :3000" || \ $B goto http://localhost:4000 2>/dev/null && echo "Found app on :4000" || \ $B goto http://localhost:8080 2>/dev/null && echo "Found app on :8080" - Test each affected page/route:
- Navigate to the page
- Take a screenshot
- Check console for errors
- If the change was interactive (forms, buttons, flows), test the interaction end-to-end
- Use
snapshot -Dbefore and after actions to verify the change had the expected effect
- Cross-reference with commit messages and PR description to understand intent — what should the change do? Verify it actually does that.
- Check TODOS.md (if it exists) for known bugs or issues related to the changed files. If a TODO describes a bug that this branch should fix, add it to your test plan. If you find a new bug during QA that isn't in TODOS.md, note it in the report.
- Report findings scoped to the branch changes:
- "Changes tested: N pages/routes affected by this branch"
- For each: does it work? Screenshot evidence.
- Any regressions on adjacent pages?
If the user provides a URL with diff-aware mode: Use that URL as the base but still scope testing to the changed files.
Full (default when URL is provided)
Systematic exploration. Visit every reachable page. Document 5-10 well-evidenced issues. Produce health score. Takes 5-15 minutes depending on app size.
Quick (--quick)
30-second smoke test. Visit homepage + top 5 navigation targets. Check: page loads? Console errors? Broken links? Produce health score. No detailed issue documentation.
Regression (--regression <baseline>)
Run full mode, then load baseline.json from a previous run. Diff: which issues are fixed? Which are new? What's the score delta? Append regression section to report.
Workflow
Phase 1: Initialize
- Find browse binary (see Setup above)
- Create output directories
- Copy report template from
qa/templates/qa-report-template.mdto output dir - Start timer for duration tracking
Phase 2: Authenticate (if needed)
If the user specified auth credentials:
$B goto <login-url>
$B snapshot -i # find the login form
$B fill @e3 "user@example.com"
$B fill @e4 "[REDACTED]" # NEVER include real passwords in report
$B click @e5 # submit
$B snapshot -D # verify login succeededIf the user provided a cookie file:
$B cookie-import cookies.json
$B goto <target-url>If 2FA/OTP is required: Ask the user for the code and wait.
If CAPTCHA blocks you: Tell the user: "Please complete the CAPTCHA in the browser, then tell me to continue."
Phase 3: Orient
Get a map of the application:
$B goto <target-url>
$B snapshot -i -a -o "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/initial.png"
$B links # map navigation structure
$B console --errors # any errors on landing?Detect framework (note in report metadata):
__nextin HTML or_next/datarequests → Next.jscsrf-tokenmeta tag → Railswp-contentin URLs → WordPress- Client-side routing with no page reloads → SPA
For SPAs: The links command may return few results because navigation is client-side. Use snapshot -i to find nav elements (buttons, menu items) instead.
Phase 4: Explore
Visit pages systematically. At each page:
$B goto <page-url>
$B snapshot -i -a -o "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/page-name.png"
$B console --errorsThen follow the per-page exploration checklist (see qa/references/issue-taxonomy.md):
- Visual scan — Look at the annotated screenshot for layout issues
- Interactive elements — Click buttons, links, controls. Do they work?
- Forms — Fill and submit. Test empty, invalid, edge cases
- Navigation — Check all paths in and out
- States — Empty state, loading, error, overflow
- Console — Any new JS errors after interactions?
- Responsiveness — Check mobile viewport if relevant:
$B viewport 375x812 $B screenshot "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/page-mobile.png" $B viewport 1280x720
Depth judgment: Spend more time on core features (homepage, dashboard, checkout, search) and less on secondary pages (about, terms, privacy).
Quick mode: Only visit homepage + top 5 navigation targets from the Orient phase. Skip the per-page checklist — just check: loads? Console errors? Broken links visible?
Phase 5: Document
Document each issue immediately when found — don't batch them.
Two evidence tiers:
Interactive bugs (broken flows, dead buttons, form failures):
- Take a screenshot before the action
- Perform the action
- Take a screenshot showing the result
- Use
snapshot -Dto show what changed - Write repro steps referencing screenshots
$B screenshot "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/issue-001-step-1.png"
$B click @e5
$B screenshot "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/issue-001-result.png"
$B snapshot -DStatic bugs (typos, layout issues, missing images):
- Take a single annotated screenshot showing the problem
- Describe what's wrong
$B snapshot -i -a -o "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/issue-002.png"Write each issue to the report immediately using the template format from qa/templates/qa-report-template.md.
Phase 6: Wrap Up
- Compute health score using the rubric below
- Write "Top 3 Things to Fix" — the 3 highest-severity issues
- Write console health summary — aggregate all console errors seen across pages
- Update severity counts in the summary table
- Fill in report metadata — date, duration, pages visited, screenshot count, framework
- Save baseline — write
baseline.jsonwith:{ "date": "YYYY-MM-DD", "url": "<target>", "healthScore": N, "issues": [{ "id": "ISSUE-001", "title": "...", "severity": "...", "category": "..." }], "categoryScores": { "console": N, "links": N, ... } }
Regression mode: After writing the report, load the baseline file. Compare:
- Health score delta
- Issues fixed (in baseline but not current)
- New issues (in current but not baseline)
- Append the regression section to the report
Health Score Rubric
Compute each category score (0-100), then take the weighted average.
Console (weight: 15%)
- 0 errors → 100
- 1-3 errors → 70
- 4-10 errors → 40
- 10+ errors → 10
Links (weight: 10%)
- 0 broken → 100
- Each broken link → -15 (minimum 0)
Per-Category Scoring (Visual, Functional, UX, Content, Performance, Accessibility)
Each category starts at 100. Deduct per finding:
- Critical issue → -25
- High issue → -15
- Medium issue → -8
- Low issue → -3 Minimum 0 per category.
Weights
| Category | Weight |
| Console | 15% |
| Links | 10% |
| Visual | 10% |
| Functional | 20% |
| UX | 15% |
| Performance | 10% |
| Content | 5% |
| Accessibility | 15% |
Final Score
score = Σ (category_score × weight)
Framework-Specific Guidance
Next.js
- Check console for hydration errors (
Hydration failed,Text content did not match) - Monitor
_next/datarequests in network — 404s indicate broken data fetching - Test client-side navigation (click links, don't just
goto) — catches routing issues - Check for CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) on pages with dynamic content
Rails
- Check for N+1 query warnings in console (if development mode)
- Verify CSRF token presence in forms
- Test Turbo/Stimulus integration — do page transitions work smoothly?
- Check for flash messages appearing and dismissing correctly
WordPress
- Check for plugin conflicts (JS errors from different plugins)
- Verify admin bar visibility for logged-in users
- Test REST API endpoints (
/wp-json/) - Check for mixed content warnings (common with WP)
General SPA (React, Vue, Angular)
- Use
snapshot -ifor navigation —linkscommand misses client-side routes - Check for stale state (navigate away and back — does data refresh?)
- Test browser back/forward — does the app handle history correctly?
- Check for memory leaks (monitor console after extended use)
Important Rules
- Repro is everything. Every issue needs at least one screenshot. No exceptions.
- Verify before documenting. Retry the issue once to confirm it's reproducible, not a fluke.
- Never include credentials. Write
[REDACTED]for passwords in repro steps. - Write incrementally. Append each issue to the report as you find it. Don't batch.
- Never read source code. Test as a user, not a developer.
- Check console after every interaction. JS errors that don't surface visually are still bugs.
- Test like a user. Use realistic data. Walk through complete workflows end-to-end.
- Depth over breadth. 5-10 well-documented issues with evidence > 20 vague descriptions.
- Never delete output files. Screenshots and reports accumulate — that's intentional.
- Use
snapshot -Cfor tricky UIs. Finds clickable divs that the accessibility tree misses. - Show screenshots to the user. After every
$B screenshot,$B snapshot -a -o, or$B responsivecommand, use the Read tool on the output file(s) so the user can see them inline. Forresponsive(3 files), Read all three. This is critical — without it, screenshots are invisible to the user. - Never refuse to use the browser. When the user invokes /qa or /qa-only, they are requesting browser-based testing. Never suggest evals, unit tests, or other alternatives as a substitute. Even if the diff appears to have no UI changes, backend changes affect app behavior — always open the browser and test.
Record baseline health score at end of Phase 6.
Output Structure
.gstack/qa-reports/
├── qa-report-{domain}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md # Structured report
├── screenshots/
│ ├── initial.png # Landing page annotated screenshot
│ ├── issue-001-step-1.png # Per-issue evidence
│ ├── issue-001-result.png
│ ├── issue-001-before.png # Before fix (if fixed)
│ ├── issue-001-after.png # After fix (if fixed)
│ └── ...
└── baseline.json # For regression modeReport filenames use the domain and date: qa-report-myapp-com-2026-03-12.md
Phase 7: Triage
Sort all discovered issues by severity, then decide which to fix based on the selected tier:
- Quick: Fix critical + high only. Mark medium/low as "deferred."
- Standard: Fix critical + high + medium. Mark low as "deferred."
- Exhaustive: Fix all, including cosmetic/low severity.
Mark issues that cannot be fixed from source code (e.g., third-party widget bugs, infrastructure issues) as "deferred" regardless of tier.
Phase 8: Fix Loop
For each fixable issue, in severity order:
8a. Locate source
# Grep for error messages, component names, route definitions
# Glob for file patterns matching the affected page- Find the source file(s) responsible for the bug
- ONLY modify files directly related to the issue
8b. Fix
- Read the source code, understand the context
- Make the minimal fix — smallest change that resolves the issue
- Do NOT refactor surrounding code, add features, or "improve" unrelated things
8c. Commit
git add <only-changed-files>
git commit -m "fix(qa): ISSUE-NNN — short description"- One commit per fix. Never bundle multiple fixes.
- Message format:
fix(qa): ISSUE-NNN — short description
8d. Re-test
- Navigate back to the affected page
- Take before/after screenshot pair
- Check console for errors
- Use
snapshot -Dto verify the change had the expected effect
$B goto <affected-url>
$B screenshot "$REPORT_DIR/screenshots/issue-NNN-after.png"
$B console --errors
$B snapshot -D8e. Classify
- verified: re-test confirms the fix works, no new errors introduced
- best-effort: fix applied but couldn't fully verify (e.g., needs auth state, external service)
- reverted: regression detected →
git revert HEAD→ mark issue as "deferred"
8e.5. Regression Test
Skip if: classification is not "verified", OR the fix is purely visual/CSS with no JS behavior, OR no test framework was detected AND user declined bootstrap.
1. Study the project's existing test patterns:
Read 2-3 test files closest to the fix (same directory, same code type). Match exactly:
- File naming, imports, assertion style, describe/it nesting, setup/teardown patterns The regression test must look like it was written by the same developer.
2. Trace the bug's codepath, then write a regression test:
Before writing the test, trace the data flow through the code you just fixed:
- What input/state triggered the bug? (the exact precondition)
- What codepath did it follow? (which branches, which function calls)
- Where did it break? (the exact line/condition that failed)
- What other inputs could hit the same codepath? (edge cases around the fix)
The test MUST:
- Set up the precondition that triggered the bug (the exact state that made it break)
- Perform the action that exposed the bug
- Assert the correct behavior (NOT "it renders" or "it doesn't throw")
- If you found adjacent edge cases while tracing, test those too (e.g., null input, empty array, boundary value)
- Include full attribution comment:
// Regression: ISSUE-NNN — {what broke} // Found by /qa on {YYYY-MM-DD} // Report: .gstack/qa-reports/qa-report-{domain}-{date}.md
Test type decision:
- Console error / JS exception / logic bug → unit or integration test
- Broken form / API failure / data flow bug → integration test with request/response
- Visual bug with JS behavior (broken dropdown, animation) → component test
- Pure CSS → skip (caught by QA reruns)
Generate unit tests. Mock all external dependencies (DB, API, Redis, file system).
Use auto-incrementing names to avoid collisions: check existing {name}.regression-*.test.{ext} files, take max number + 1.
3. Run only the new test file:
{detected test command} {new-test-file}4. Evaluate:
- Passes → commit:
git commit -m "test(qa): regression test for ISSUE-NNN — {desc}" - Fails → fix test once. Still failing → delete test, defer.
- Taking >2 min exploration → skip and defer.
5. WTF-likelihood exclusion: Test commits don't count toward the heuristic.
8f. Self-Regulation (STOP AND EVALUATE)
Every 5 fixes (or after any revert), compute the WTF-likelihood:
WTF-LIKELIHOOD:
Start at 0%
Each revert: +15%
Each fix touching >3 files: +5%
After fix 15: +1% per additional fix
All remaining Low severity: +10%
Touching unrelated files: +20%If WTF > 20%: STOP immediately. Show the user what you've done so far. Ask whether to continue.
Hard cap: 50 fixes. After 50 fixes, stop regardless of remaining issues.
Phase 9: Final QA
After all fixes are applied:
- Re-run QA on all affected pages
- Compute final health score
- If final score is WORSE than baseline: WARN prominently — something regressed
Phase 10: Report
Write the report to both local and project-scoped locations:
Local: .gstack/qa-reports/qa-report-{domain}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md
Project-scoped: Write test outcome artifact for cross-session context:
eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)" && mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUGWrite to ~/.gstack/projects/{slug}/{user}-{branch}-test-outcome-{datetime}.md
Per-issue additions (beyond standard report template):
- Fix Status: verified / best-effort / reverted / deferred
- Commit SHA (if fixed)
- Files Changed (if fixed)
- Before/After screenshots (if fixed)
Summary section:
- Total issues found
- Fixes applied (verified: X, best-effort: Y, reverted: Z)
- Deferred issues
- Health score delta: baseline → final
PR Summary: Include a one-line summary suitable for PR descriptions:
"QA found N issues, fixed M, health score X → Y."
Phase 11: TODOS.md Update
If the repo has a TODOS.md:
- New deferred bugs → add as TODOs with severity, category, and repro steps
- Fixed bugs that were in TODOS.md → annotate with "Fixed by /qa on {branch}, {date}"
Capture Learnings
If you discovered a non-obvious pattern, pitfall, or architectural insight during this session, log it for future sessions:
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-learnings-log '{"skill":"gstack-qa","type":"TYPE","key":"SHORT_KEY","insight":"DESCRIPTION","confidence":N,"source":"SOURCE","files":["path/to/relevant/file"]}'Types: pattern (reusable approach), pitfall (what NOT to do), preference
(user stated), architecture (structural decision), tool (library/framework insight),
operational (project environment/CLI/workflow knowledge).
Sources: observed (you found this in the code), user-stated (user told you),
inferred (AI deduction), cross-model (both Claude and Codex agree).
Confidence: 1-10. Be honest. An observed pattern you verified in the code is 8-9. An inference you're not sure about is 4-5. A user preference they explicitly stated is 10.
files: Include the specific file paths this learning references. This enables staleness detection: if those files are later deleted, the learning can be flagged.
Only log genuine discoveries. Don't log obvious things. Don't log things the user already knows. A good test: would this insight save time in a future session? If yes, log it.
Additional Rules (qa-specific)
- Clean working tree required. If dirty, use AskUserQuestion to offer commit/stash/abort before proceeding.
- One commit per fix. Never bundle multiple fixes into one commit.
- Only modify tests when generating regression tests in Phase 8e.5. Never modify CI configuration. Never modify existing tests — only create new test files.
- Revert on regression. If a fix makes things worse,
git revert HEADimmediately. - Self-regulate. Follow the WTF-likelihood heuristic. When in doubt, stop and ask.
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.

