write-test-plan
Skill0 starsChanged 16 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write test cases from requirements and contracts, each with data and expected result. Use when the user asks for a test plan, test cases, QA cases, or /write-test-plan. Do not invent requirements. Do not implement product code.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- busycaesar/Harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- busycaesar/Harness★ 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 repository66 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- a11y-passSkill
- assess-changeSkill
- build-regression-packSkill
- charter-exploratorySkill
- classify-dataSkill
- commitSkill
- cut-releaseSkill
- data-changeSkill
- debugSkill
- design-experimentSkill
- diff-environmentsSkill
- draft-steercoSkill
- engineering-barSkill
- explain-codeSkill
- explore-codebaseSkill
- fix-ciSkill
- handoffSkill
- implement-changeSkill
- incident-triageSkill
- lean-reviewSkill
- map-dependenciesSkill
- map-design-handoffSkill
- map-processSkill
- open-prSkill
- performanceSkill
- plan-data-migrationSkill
- plan-incrementSkill
- plan-rollbackSkill
- plan-uatSkill
- prioritize-backlogSkill
- production-passSkill
- ready-to-mergeSkill
- record-decisionSkill
- refactor-safelySkill
- revert-changeSkill
- review-architectureSkill
- review-changeSkill
- review-pipelineSkill
- security-passSkill
- shape-workSkill
- ship-notesSkill
- spec-analyticsSkill
- spec-observabilitySkill
- start-projectSkill
- synthesize-discoverySkill
- triage-blockersSkill
- triage-defectSkill
- update-raidSkill
- verify-uiSkill
- write-api-examplesSkill
- write-architectureSkill
- write-designSkill
- write-dev-tasksSkill
- write-docsSkill
- write-integration-contractSkill
- write-nfrSkill
- write-opportunitySkill
- write-prdSkill
- write-requirementsSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
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 19
Do not invent requirements.
- Distinctive: line 33
Test strategy if it exists (honor will-not-automate)
- Distinctive: line 35
If there is no spec, stop.
- Distinctive: line 44
Read AGENTS.md if present.
- Very specific: line 49
Do not list cases the strategy said will not be automated unless marked manual.
≈ “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
Write test plan
Turn the contract into cases. This is not strategy (write-test-strategy), not UAT (plan-uat), and not write-tests.
Do not invent requirements.
Is this the right skill?
| Signal | Do this instead |
| Layers / will-not-automate | write-test-strategy first if missing |
| Business sign-off scripts | plan-uat |
| Code tests in the repo | write-tests |
| Time-boxed exploration | charter-exploratory |
Required inputs
- Requirements path and/or contracts
- Test strategy if it exists (honor will-not-automate)
If there is no spec, stop.
Human decisions (do not invent)
- Environment not in
context/environments.md - Cases that contradict will-not-automate (must be explicit)
Procedure
- Read
AGENTS.mdif present. Read strategy, requirements, contracts. - Find the home:
docs/qa/plan-<slug>.md. - Open references/test-plan-template.md. Copy every heading. Write
n/awhen unused. - Each case: id, traces to requirement or contract or defect, data (synthetic), expected, layer.
- Include at least one deny/error case when the spec has those journeys.
- Do not list cases the strategy said will not be automated unless marked
manual.
Output
- Path:
docs/qa/plan-<slug>.md - Template:
references/test-plan-template.md
Quality bar
- Every case traces to a requirement, contract, or defect id
- Data is synthetic
- Will-not-automate from strategy is respected or explicitly overridden
- Unused headings are
n/a
Done
- Path
- Case count
- Next skill:
write-tests,charter-exploratory,plan-uat
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.