CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

qa-expert

This skill should be used when establishing comprehensive QA testing processes for any software project. Use when creating test strategies, writing test cases following Google Testing Standards, executing test plans, tracking bugs with P0-P4 classification, calculating quality metrics, or generating progress reports. Includes autonomous execution capability via master prompts and complete documentation templates for third-party QA team handoffs. Implements OWASP security testing and achieves 90% coverage targets.

77

1.51x
Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

94%

1.51x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./qa-expert/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

35%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill attempts comprehensive coverage of QA processes but suffers from significant verbosity and redundancy—autonomous execution alone is described three times. While it provides some concrete commands and a clear reference structure, most guidance remains at the procedural description level rather than providing executable examples or filled-out templates inline. The workflow steps lack the validation checkpoints and error recovery loops that are critical for a skill involving batch test execution and CSV tracking integrity.

Suggestions

Consolidate redundant sections: merge the three autonomous execution descriptions into one, remove the 'When to Use' trigger list (Claude can infer this), and move project sizing and Day 1 onboarding entirely to reference files.

Add a concrete, filled-out test case example inline (showing actual AAA pattern with real values) and a filled-out bug report example, rather than just describing the format abstractly.

Add explicit validation checkpoints to workflows, e.g., after writing test cases ('Validate: ensure each TC has unique ID, priority, and expected result') and after CSV updates ('Verify row count matches executed test count').

Trim the quality gates table and severity classification to essential information only—these are reference material that belongs in a separate file, with just the key thresholds (80% pass rate, 0 P0 bugs) mentioned inline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is extremely verbose at ~250+ lines, with significant redundancy. The Quick Start section repeats the init command that appears again in Core Capabilities §1. Autonomous execution is explained three separate times (§3, dedicated section, and Pattern 2). The 'When to Use This Skill' section lists 9 triggers that Claude can infer. Severity classifications, project sizing tables, and success criteria add bulk without adding actionable value Claude doesn't already know.

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides some concrete commands (init_qa_project.py, calculate_metrics.py) and references to templates, but most guidance is procedural description rather than executable code. Test case writing is described abstractly ('follow AAA pattern') without a concrete example. Bug reporting lists fields but doesn't show a filled-out example. The 'Common Patterns' are numbered lists of steps rather than executable workflows. No bundle files are provided to verify that referenced scripts/templates actually exist.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are listed (e.g., test execution has 4 steps, common patterns have numbered sequences) but lack explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery. The Ground Truth Principle is mentioned but the feedback loop for what happens when doc/CSV sync fails is deferred to a reference file. The 'Starting Fresh QA' pattern has no validation step between writing test cases and autonomous execution. For a skill involving batch operations and tracking integrity, the absence of inline validation/retry loops is notable.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references multiple external files (references/, assets/, scripts/) with clear one-level-deep navigation, which is good structure. However, since no bundle files are provided, we cannot verify these references exist. More importantly, the main SKILL.md itself contains too much inline content that could be in reference files (e.g., the full quality gates table, severity classification details, project sizing guidelines, Day 1 onboarding summary). The Reference Documents section is well-organized but the body doesn't practice what it preaches about progressive disclosure.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a strong skill description that clearly articulates specific capabilities, includes natural trigger terms, explicitly states both what the skill does and when to use it, and occupies a distinct niche. The description is comprehensive without being padded, covering concrete actions like test case writing, bug tracking with specific classification systems, and security testing standards. Minor improvement could come from slightly tightening the language, but overall it performs well across all dimensions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: creating test strategies, writing test cases, executing test plans, tracking bugs with P0-P4 classification, calculating quality metrics, generating progress reports, OWASP security testing, and documentation templates for handoffs.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (creating test strategies, writing test cases, tracking bugs, calculating metrics, generating reports, security testing) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when' clause listing specific trigger scenarios like creating test strategies, writing test cases, executing test plans, etc.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'QA testing', 'test strategies', 'test cases', 'test plans', 'bugs', 'quality metrics', 'progress reports', 'security testing', 'coverage targets', 'Google Testing Standards', 'OWASP'. Good coverage of terms a user needing QA help would naturally use.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clearly occupies a distinct niche around comprehensive QA testing processes with specific differentiators like Google Testing Standards, P0-P4 bug classification, OWASP security testing, master prompts for autonomous execution, and third-party QA team handoff templates. Unlikely to conflict with general coding or documentation skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
daymade/claude-code-skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.