exploratory-testing
Skill26 starsChanged 7 days agoMITView on GitHub
Ticket-free exploratory testing of a critical flow, a module or the whole product, across UI, API and DB together, in the Execution stage. Runs a charter, a parallel reconnaissance fan-out, a refutation pass whose job is to kill each finding, a main-thread tie-break, and a handoff where every candidate scenario is executed live, marked NEW / WEAK / COVERED against existing coverage (the coverage gap list, or the KATA manifest plus the TMS), and marked `oracle: observed` until a person confirms it. Feeds `test-documentation` (ROI decides per scenario) and, for behaviour with no Story, the coverage Tech Story. Use whenever the user wants to hunt bugs or find test candidates without a specific ticket, explore a module or flow end to end, run a periodic sweep or health-check round, go back for the gaps the coverage inventory found, or seed test-documentation with validated scenarios. Triggers on: exploratory testing, explore the <module> module, find bugs in <flow>, sweep the app, health-check round, hunt for bugs, discover test candidates, explore the coverage gaps, characterize what the product does, testing exploratorio, explora el modulo de X, busca bugs en, barrido de la app, recorre los huecos de cobertura. Do NOT use for: testing one ticket against its ACs (sprint-testing), formalizing TCs with ROI (test-documentation), writing automated test code (test-automation), building the coverage inventory itself (project-context mode coverage), or pre-code refinement (shift-left-testing).
11 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jason0971/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Marina-Gajego/qa-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- petrkindlmann/qa-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- fishzjp/qa-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
- testified-oss/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- mejbaurbahar/software-tester-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use analytics-tracking-testing, compliance-testing and 5 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
petrkindlmannSkillanalytics-tracking-testing
Validate that analytics and marketing tracking fire CORRECTLY: GA4/GTM dataLayer events, Meta/TikTok/LinkedIn pixels, and ad-tech tags. Covers building a tracking plan as the contract, intercepting collect-endpoint beacons and dataLayer.push in Playwright, asserting event name + params + values + timing + de-duplication, Consent Mode v2 gating, CI regression gating, and news-media events (article-view, scroll-depth, paywall). Use when: "test analytics tracking," "GA4 event test," "verify the pixel fires," "dataLayer test," "tracking plan," "Meta Pixel dedup," "scroll-depth tracking test," "gate tracking in CI." Not for: whether tracking is ALLOWED to fire under consent law (GDPR/CMP) — that is compliance-testing; this skill checks the data is CORRECT. SEO meta tags / structured data — out of scope. Related: compliance-testing, playwright-automation, api-testing, qa-project-context.
Also in 3 projects that use this
petrkindlmannSkillcompliance-testing
Test for regulatory compliance: GDPR/CMP consent verification, Google Consent Mode v2, Global Privacy Control (GPC), CCPA/US state opt-out, EU AI Act Article 50 transparency, Better Ads Standards, and cookie-inventory auditing. Covers automated consent-flow testing, policy-based script blocking before consent, and cookie drift detection. Use when: "GDPR test," "compliance," "CMP test," "cookie consent," "consent mode," "CCPA," "GPC," "AI Act," "Better Ads," "privacy banner." Not for: WCAG/axe-core test authoring — use accessibility-testing. Not for: OWASP/vuln scanning — use security-testing. Not for: evaluating your LLM feature's quality or safety — use ai-system-testing. Related: accessibility-testing, security-testing, ai-system-testing, ci-cd-integration.
Also in 3 projects that use this
conorluddySkillaccessibility-testing
WCAG compliance testing and accessibility quality assurance workflows for iOS apps. Use when validating accessibility labels, testing VoiceOver compatibility, checking contrast ratios, or ensuring WCAG 2.1 compliance. Covers accessibility tree analysis, semantic validation, and automated accessibility testing patterns.
Also in 3 projects that use this
jarosser06Skilltest-strategy
Plans pytest test strategies for Drift's 90%+ coverage requirement using coverage analysis, edge case identification, and test suite design. Use when determining what tests to write, analyzing coverage gaps, or planning test strategies.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +3 more from petrkindlmann
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 11
- petrkindlmann/qa-skills★ 209same name
- fishzjp/qa-skills★ 62same name
- cakehurstryan/QE-Skills★ 15same name
- mattwynne/skills★ 6same name
- Marina-Gajego/qa-skills★ 5same name
- Cristhianzl/pocket-claude★ 2same name
- jason0971/skills★ 1same name
- mejbaurbahar/software-tester-skills★ 1same name
- Abdox-menara/guard-skills★ 0same name
- testified-oss/agent-skills★ 0same name
1 more not listed
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 repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- acliSkill
- agentic-qa-coreSkill
- agentic-qa-onboardSkill
- bug-screenshot-annotationSkill
- business-api-contextSkill
- business-data-contextSkill
- business-domain-contextSkill
- business-e2e-contextSkill
- evidence-artifactSkill
- framework-developmentSkill
- git-flow-masterSkill
- infra-contextSkill
- iql-contextSkill
- jira-administrationSkill
- judgment-daySkill
- orca-orchestrationSkill
- project-contextSkill
- project-discoverySkill
- pr-review-leadSkill
- regression-testingSkill
- session-handoffSkill
- shift-left-testingSkill
- sprint-conductorSkill
- sprint-testingSkill
- test-automationSkill
- test-documentationSkill
- test-framework-adaptationSkill
- xray-cliSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 109
Never call anything that sends, notifies or pushes downstream.
- Very specific: line 137
Every dispatch follows the 7-component briefing (agentic-qa-core/references/briefing-template.md).
- Very specific: line 210
Every step closes with its checkpoint in progress.md.
- Distinctive: line 221
Observed is not intended: Never write what the product did as the expected result of a scenario before a person confirms it.
- Distinctive: line 228
Language: every artifact (charter, findings, candidate scenarios, bug drafts, commits) in English.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 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
Forbidden invocations
NEVER invoke /sdd-* skills from this workflow. SDD is an optional
user-installed ceremony; this skill ships self-contained and does not chain
SDD under any condition. If you need to refactor KATA, fixtures, cli/,
scripts/, or api/schemas/ pipeline, exit this skill first and invoke
/framework-development.
This boundary is mechanical, not advisory: scripts/lint-skills.ts rejects
any /sdd- mention outside this section. See:
.agents/skills/agentic-qa-core/references/skill-composition-strategy.md §4
(governs users who manually install SDD).
Exploratory Testing — Find Bugs, Discover Test Candidates, Without a Ticket
Freestyle but precise testing across a critical flow, a module, or the whole product: UI, API and DB
together, never one alone. No ticket required. This skill hunts for real bugs in the highest-risk surfaces
(data integrity and security first) and produces candidate scenarios that were executed live and
checked against existing coverage, so test-documentation receives new work, not a second copy of
what the repository already holds.
The method rests on four disciplines, and skipping any of them is how a plausible-looking anomaly becomes a wrong bug report: a parallel reconnaissance fan-out, a refutation pass whose job is to kill findings, a main-thread tie-break when verifiers disagree, and evidence-backed reporting. This repository adds the fifth: the coverage view, built before anyone explores, so every candidate says whether it is NEW, WEAK or already COVERED.
Position in the pipeline
This is the second entry into the Execution stage (agentic-qa-core/references/stage-gates.md
§"The stages, by name"): same stage, entry by SCOPE instead of by ticket. It is the explore and confirm
steps of the discovery-driven flow (agentic-qa-core/references/discovery-driven-doctrine.md §1).
project-context coverage (gap list) --+
v
[exploratory-testing]
| | |
v v v
confirmed bugs candidate scenarios behaviour with no Story
(person signs, NEW / WEAK, oracle -> coverage Tech Story
sprint-testing confirmed -> ROI in (person signs; doctrine §3)
retests later) test-documentationDependencies
Requires agentic-qa-core. Loads on demand:
agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md: MANDATORY before the Refute and Tie-break steps.agentic-qa-core/references/discovery-driven-doctrine.md: MANDATORY before marking any candidate (the oracle rule §4, the outcome vocabulary and blocking ladder §5, the coverage anchor §3, risk vs ROI §7).agentic-qa-core/references/defect-management-doctrine.md: MANDATORY before proposing any Bug / Defect / Improvement.agentic-qa-core/references/test-design-doctrine.md: techniques applied to the code, the schema and the observed behaviour instead of an AC (Part 2).agentic-qa-core/references/briefing-template.md,agentic-qa-core/references/dispatch-patterns.md,agentic-qa-core/references/orchestration-doctrine.md,agentic-qa-core/references/session-management.md,agentic-qa-core/references/preflight-gate.md,agentic-qa-core/references/decision-elicitation-doctrine.md: cited inline by the sections that use them.
Compact Rules
Exploration operational rules (binding):
- Ticket-free entry into the Execution stage: the scope is a flow, a module or a sweep, never a ticket key (a named ticket routes to
sprint-testing). Mode from the first$ARGUMENTStoken (flow|module|sweep), or from a request that clearly names one flow, one module or a sweep (args-as-answers); otherwise ASK. - Five steps, always in order: Charter (main thread) -> Recon (Parallel) -> Refute (Parallel) -> Tie-break (main thread) -> Handoff (main thread). Planning and tie-breaks are never delegated. The charter is presented and confirmed before any Recon dispatch, unless the request already named the scope and said go.
- Build the coverage view BEFORE Recon: the gap list of
project-contextmodecoveragewhen it exists, elsecoverage-view.jsonfromkata-manifest.json+ the TMS Tests read bybun run context:coverage collect(never byjira:sync-issues: Tests aresync: never); a TMS not read is statedTMS not readand no manual cover counts. Every candidate is marked NEW / WEAK / COVERED; only a countedexercisescover makes COVERED; aweak, stale or unverified cover never dedupes a candidate away. - Compare at least 2-3 rows plus a control group before calling anything anomalous, and state the detection query verbatim.
Verification doctrine (binding — full canon: agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md):
- Refute mandate: every Medium+ anomaly gets a Parallel verifier told to REFUTE it (join fan-out, data quirk, intended behaviour, harness artifact); it survives only if it cannot be explained away. Check a row's own invariant, not just that it differs from another row; execute competing hypotheses side by side, never infer them.
- Verifier disagreement goes to a main-thread tie-break: a decisive query plus a direct read of the live code path. Never a third verifier, never an average, never one agent's verdict alone on a data-integrity, money or security finding.
Oracle and outcomes (binding — full canon: agentic-qa-core/references/discovery-driven-doctrine.md §4, §5):
- Oracle: behaviour with no AC is
oracle: observed; "is this intended?" goes to a person (decision-protocol kind 1), a batch through themkddeck, a single question through the question tool.oracle: confirmed(who, where, when) makes the observation PASSED;not intendedmakes it FAILED and a proposed defect. - A candidate is PASSED or FAILED only when observed in the environment its precondition names; a code read, unit test, green CI or another environment leaves it NOT RUN with exactly one reason, BLOCKED or DEFERRED (execution), and it climbs the blocking ladder; with no coverable yet, its follow-up lives on the coverage Tech Story once approved, and until then as an item of the Handoff deck.
Safety and signatures (binding):
- Never call anything that sends, notifies or pushes downstream; reads and previews are fine. A project's own list (
## Never-call endpointsinagent-project.md) is carried verbatim in briefing component 7. - Mutations only to set up a precondition, within the charter's budget. Every created row goes into
created_rowsthe moment it exists; cleanup re-reads each one (a delete's response code is not proof). - Person-signed writes: every bug (
sprint-testing/references/reporting-templates.md§1, gate §1.12, classified perdefect-management-doctrine.mdPart 1), every coverage Tech Story (discovery-driven-doctrine.md§3), every module-context write. This skill creates no Test and scores no ROI. - Evidence that reaches a person goes through the
evidence-artifactskill; raw captures stay in the sessionevidence/until a coverable exists. - On any subagent failure: STOP, report which surface or finding failed, offer retry / skip-surface / abort; a skipped surface is recorded "not covered this round", never dropped silently. A skill that itself broke is reported upstream per
agentic-qa-core/references/upstream-feedback.md.
Read full SKILL.md when: starting a round cold, resuming a session, or handling a sweep, a tie-break or a Handoff not covered by the rules above.
Inputs — read these first, in this order
.agents/project.yaml: environments,testing.default_env,testing.tc_creation_stage, the backend and frontend repositories,orchestration.max_workers,qa.qa_epics.- The gap list of
project-contextmodecoverage(<<PRIMARY_ROOT>>/.session/project-context/coverage/gap-list.json; schema:project-context/references/coverage.md§"gap-list.json"). Optional: without it, the Charter step builds the coverage view itself. kata-manifest.json: the ATCs already automated (Critical Rule #12)..context/PBI/qa-artifacts/master-test-plan.md: the risk level of each flow, which orders the queue.- The business maps, read with
bun run context:map <slug>:business-e2e-contextfirst, thenbusiness-api-contextandbusiness-data-contextper touched level;business-domain-contextfor the vocabulary of every scenario title. - The module's synced
module-context.mdunder.context/PBI/epics/(fixtures, gotchas, trap instances, prior rounds). agent-project.md## Never-call endpoints, when the project has written one.
Subagent Dispatch Strategy
Orchestration & Session contracts: this skill follows
agentic-qa-core/references/orchestration-doctrine.md(mandatory subagent dispatch — main thread is command center) ANDagentic-qa-core/references/session-management.md(Phase 0 resume check, plan-first persistence at.session/<skill-slug>/<scope>/, archive on completion). Phase 0 (resume check) and Phase 1 (plan write) are NOT optional.
This skill is per-round scope: <scope> = <YYYY-MM-DD>-<scope-slug> (e.g. 2026-05-20-orders, 2026-05-20-checkout-flow, 2026-05-20-sweep). Session state lives at <<PRIMARY_ROOT>>/.session/exploratory-testing/<scope>/ per agentic-qa-core/references/session-management.md §3 + §9; its files are listed in references/handoff-and-reporting.md. The plan write is the charter: plan.md follows the §6 schema and points at charter.md.
Every dispatch follows the 7-component briefing (agentic-qa-core/references/briefing-template.md); the pattern per step follows agentic-qa-core/references/dispatch-patterns.md. The orchestrator verifies each step's DoD (agentic-qa-core/references/stage-gates.md §"Execution (exploration without a ticket)") before recording its checkpoint and advancing.
| Step | Pattern | Subagent role | Reference |
| Charter | inline (main thread) | none: planning is never delegated. Mode, scope, coverage view, recon plan, environment gate, confirmation | references/scope-and-recon-planning.md |
| Recon | Parallel | one Recon agent per surface or module, at most orchestration.max_workers at once, each returning the structured schema | references/recon-fanout.md |
| Refute | Parallel | one verifier per Medium+ anomaly, mandate REFUTE | agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md §1-§3 |
| Tie-break | inline (main thread) | none: a subagent's verdict on a data-integrity, money or security finding is never the last word | agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md §4 |
| Handoff | Single per artifact | one subagent per bug draft or per anchor proposal; candidate-scenarios.md, the oracle deck and the module-context harvest stay in the main thread (they need the whole round's state) | references/handoff-and-reporting.md |
Why Parallel for Recon and Refute: each surface and each finding is independent: no shared state, no ordering. A sweep of many modules run serially would take hours; the fan-out is the point.
Why the main thread for Charter and Tie-break: the charter is planning; the tie-break exists because a single agent's verdict on a high-cost finding is not trustworthy enough to be final.
On any subagent failure: STOP, report the partial state (which surfaces and findings completed, which rows were created), present retry / skip-surface / abort. A skipped surface is recorded in
session.mdas "not covered this round", never silently omitted. No auto-fix, no auto-rollback. A skill that itself broke (a wrong step, a missing verifier, a stale rule) is reported upstream per../agentic-qa-core/references/upstream-feedback.md: drafted and redacted locally, filed only on explicit OK, verified withgh issue view.
Fleet seam (optional)
Recon runs on in-turn subagents by default. A sweep large enough to outgrow one turn may run one persistent worker per module instead, only when the user asks for it:
- Topology: same checkout. Recon writes nothing to the repository, only the session directory, one
recon/<surface>.jsonper worker. No worktree is needed. - The conductor writes
launch.txtin the session directory, one self-contained line per module, always. Launching and supervising those sessions isorca-orchestration/SKILL.md([ORCHESTRATION_TOOL]);launch.txtis the payload for the human-paste fallback. - Refute, Tie-break and Handoff stay with the conductor. Workers return Recon reports and their
created_rows; they never file, never ask the person, never tie-break. - Silence rule: the absence of an orchestration transport is never named to the user and never appears in the charter or the session record.
Readiness Preflight Gate (MANDATORY — runs before Phase 0)
Full doctrine:
agentic-qa-core/references/preflight-gate.md. Two laws: (1) args-as-answers: the mode, the scope and a named environment are provided args; ask only the gaps. (2) probe, don't assume. Surface gaps and REDs as ONE checklist question; STOP on a blocking RED. The generic baseline (environment, test-user credentials by name, secret and restart handling) is inherited from §3.1. Below is only this skill's delta.
| Capability | Need | Why here |
| Environment reachable + roles signed in | REQUIRED | Every candidate must be observed live in a named environment (doctrine §5.2). Roles through the app's own login (agentic-qa-core/references/browser-sessions.md §4). |
DB ([DB_TOOL]) and API schema ([API_TOOL]) | REQUIRED | Recon reads both on every surface. Point-of-use check per preflight-gate.md §8; missing → STOP and name the capability. |
Browser (/playwright-cli) | SCOPE: surfaces with UI | The UI leg of the Trifuerza. |
| Business maps + MTP | REQUIRED for a sweep, SOFT for a module | bun run context:map <slug> --list shows sections, no placeholder notice. A module round narrows to what code and environment show and says so. |
| Coverage view source | SOFT | The gap list, or kata-manifest.json + TMS read access to build coverage-view.json. Without the TMS, manual covers are unknown: every candidate claiming one is NEW and the charter says why. |
Issue tracker ([ISSUE_TRACKER_TOOL]) | SCOPE: Handoff writes | Only when a person approves a bug, a Tech Story or a module-context write. Load /acli. |
Phase 0 — Session resume check + Session Init
0.0 Resume check (agentic-qa-core/references/session-management.md §4). Compute <scope> = <YYYY-MM-DD>-<scope-slug>. Check <<PRIMARY_ROOT>>/.session/exploratory-testing/<scope>/progress.md (from a worktree, say so in one line and look in the primary). If it exists, read plan.md, charter.md and the tail of progress.md, surface the last completed step and the next one, and offer resume / restart / abort. On restart, archive the directory to .session/.archive/<YYYY-MM-DD>-exploratory-testing-<scope>-aborted/ first.
0.1 Mode. The first $ARGUMENTS token flow, module or sweep IS the mode and the rest is forwarded; a request that clearly names one flow, one module or a whole-product sweep is the answer too (args-as-answers); a ticket key routes to sprint-testing; otherwise ask the mode question (references/scope-and-recon-planning.md §1).
0.2 Create the session directory, write plan.md (§6 schema, the ## Inputs H2 names the coverage view source and the environment) and append ## Phase 0 — Session Init — <ISO-8601 UTC> with next: Charter to progress.md.
Workflow — five steps, always in this order
Charter -- mode + scope source + charter.md + coverage view + recon plan + env gate
-> PRESENT the charter, WAIT for confirmation references/scope-and-recon-planning.md
Recon (Parallel) -- one agent per surface: DB + API [+ UI], Trifuerza technique
-> structured schema incl. observed[] with covered_by and created_rows
-> compare 2-3 rows + a control group before any anomaly references/recon-fanout.md
Refute (Parallel) -- one verifier per Medium+ anomaly, mandate REFUTE
-> own invariant, competing hypotheses executed agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md
Tie-break (main thread) -- only where verifiers disagree
-> decisive query + direct read of the live code path adversarial-verification.md §4
Handoff (main thread) -- findings/FNN-*.md (confirmed AND refuted)
-> candidate-scenarios.md, each NEW / WEAK / COVERED, oracle: observed
-> ONE deck for the person: oracle answers, bugs to file, Tech Stories, module context
-> approved writes, cleanup re-read, session.md, footer, archive
references/handoff-and-reporting.mdEvery step closes with its checkpoint in progress.md. A step that returns a partial result is NEEDS REVISION, never advanced (stage-gates.md §"The gate rule").
Handoff decisions, by weight
The instrument follows the weight of the decisions, never their count (AGENTS.md §2). A round's Handoff is usually a report the person reacts to point by point, each item with its own option set: the oracle answer per candidate, file or discard per finding, the grain and approval of each Tech Story, the module context harvest. That report goes into one mkd decision deck (agentic-qa-core/references/decision-elicitation-doctrine.md); a round with a single small item asks it through the question tool. A blocking item (a row that cannot be cleaned up, a credential failure) is asked at once, never held for the deck.
Gotchas — apply every invocation
- A weak cover is not coverage. A test that runs through a behaviour without checking it leaves the candidate WEAK, and WEAK is handed off. Only a counted
exercisescover makes COVERED. - Observed is not intended. Never write what the product did as the expected result of a scenario before a person confirms it; that freezes whatever defect was observed (doctrine §4).
- Compare 2-3 rows before calling an anomaly. One row, or a loose
GROUP BY, is a lead (references/recon-fanout.md§2). - Check the row's own invariant. Two rows differing proves nothing; a row that breaks its own formula and matches another row's value is a copy (
adversarial-verification.md§2). - Execute the simulation, never infer it. Same rule as
sprint-testing/references/exploration-patterns.mdand doctrine §5.2. - Size by reachability. A defect in a hidden or unlinked route is real, but its severity reflects who can reach it: map endpoint -> handler -> caller -> navigation entry first (
adversarial-verification.md§4, §5). - Sparse environment data breaks "regressed this sprint". Say so in the finding instead of guessing at recency.
- Read the live schema before a query leans on a column name: project docs drift.
- Language: every artifact (charter, findings, candidate scenarios, bug drafts, commits) in English; the conversation mirrors the user.
- Session footer, chat only: capture paths the instant they exist and again at close, plus skills, MCPs, CLIs and testing levels, execution framing (
agentic-qa-core/references/session-footer-contract.md).
Skills to load
| Skill | Load when |
playwright-cli | before any browser step of a Recon UI sub-task |
evidence-artifact | when a confirmed finding becomes a bug draft, or the round's confirmed scenarios are reviewed as a batch |
acli | before any Handoff write a person approved (bug, Tech Story, module context) |
xray-cli | only to read Xray-side membership when building coverage-view.json under Modality jira-xray |
mkd | the Handoff deck (T4, named here as the instrument: loaded without asking; absent → offer the install in one line and fall back to the question tool) |
Cross-skill handoff — what this skill does NOT do
| Before this skill | After this skill |
project-context mode coverage (optional): the gap list, ordered by MTP risk | test-documentation: candidate-scenarios.md (NEW and WEAK only; only oracle: confirmed is scored, Gate 0), scope discovery-driven on a coverage Tech Story, module-driven on an existing coverable; with no anchor, the coverage Tech Story is proposed first (doctrine §2.1, §3) and intake runs as discovery-driven once it exists |
| (none required: a self-starting entry, on demand or as a scheduled round) | sprint-testing: filed bugs re-enter its retest cycle once fixed |
project-context modes e2e / api / data: a behaviour the maps lack, proposed as a map section |
This skill produces no ATP, ATR or TC, scores no ROI and writes no test code. A named ticket routes to sprint-testing.
Pseudocode tags used here
| Tag | Resolves to | Defined in |
[DB_TOOL] | the DB MCP of the active environment (db_mcp) | AGENTS.md Tool Resolution |
[API_TOOL] | the OpenAPI MCP (schema only) + curl | AGENTS.md Tool Resolution |
[AUTOMATION_TOOL] | /playwright-cli | AGENTS.md Tool Resolution |
[ISSUE_TRACKER_TOOL] | acli, or {{ISSUE_TRACKER_CLI}} | AGENTS.md Tool Resolution |
[TMS_TOOL] | xray-cli (jira-xray) or acli (jira-native) | AGENTS.md Tool Resolution |
[ORCHESTRATION_TOOL] | the multi-session orchestration CLI (fleet seam only) | orca-orchestration/SKILL.md |
References — read the narrow one for the situation
| Reference | Read when |
references/scope-and-recon-planning.md | Charter: the modes, the scope sources, the charter template, the coverage view, the recon plan, the environment gate, the confirmation |
references/recon-fanout.md | Recon: the per-agent schema, the 2-3 rows rule, tool limits, the never-call boundary, mutation discipline, a filled briefing |
agentic-qa-core/references/adversarial-verification.md | Refute and Tie-break: the mandate, the own-invariant check, executing hypotheses, the tie-break, the trap categories |
references/handoff-and-reporting.md | Handoff: the session layout, session.md, findings, candidate-scenarios.md with its marks and outcomes, the anchor, the oracle deck, evidence, bugs, module context, cleanup, close |
Pre-flight checklist
- Mode picked (Critical-Flow-Targeted / Module-Targeted / Whole-App Sweep), not a ticket key
module-context.mdread for every in-scope module- Coverage view built (gap list
run_id, orcoverage-view.json, withTMS not readstated when it was not) and passed to every Recon agent - Charter written and confirmed; environment gate and tool probe passed
- Recon dispatched Parallel, one agent per surface, every report in the schema (
created_rowseven if empty) - Every Medium+ anomaly refuted or survived; every disagreement settled by the tie-break
- One
findings/FNN-*.mdper finding, confirmed and refuted - Every candidate marked NEW / WEAK / COVERED and carrying its outcome and oracle state
- The Handoff decisions asked by weight; only approved writes made, each read back
- Module-context harvest asked for every touched module, or recorded as skipped ("nothing cleared the bar")
- Every
created_rowsentry re-read gone session.mdwritten; session footer printed (execution framing);Refinements proposed:line present
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.

