CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

qa-testing

Skill do QA Engineer para testes unitarios, integracao e E2E. Use quando precisar escrever testes, validar regressao, revisar cobertura, configurar estrategia de QA, ou evidenciar qualidade antes de release. Trigger em: "teste", "test", "QA", "Playwright", "Vitest", "Jest", "E2E", "coverage", "mock", "fixture", "regressao", "teste de integracao", "testing library".

73

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/05-qa-testing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Discovery

89%

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 with excellent trigger term coverage spanning multiple languages and specific testing tools. The completeness is good with explicit 'Use quando' and 'Trigger em' sections. The main weakness is that the capability descriptions could be more concrete with specific actions rather than general categories like 'configurar estrategia de QA'.

Suggestions

Make capabilities more concrete by specifying actions like 'generate test fixtures', 'create mock implementations', 'analyze coverage reports', 'write Playwright page objects' instead of general phrases like 'configurar estrategia de QA'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (QA/testing) and lists some actions like 'escrever testes', 'validar regressao', 'revisar cobertura', 'configurar estrategia de QA', but these are somewhat general categories rather than highly specific concrete actions like 'generate test fixtures' or 'create mock implementations'.

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (QA Engineer skill for unit, integration, and E2E tests) and 'when' with explicit 'Use quando' clause listing specific scenarios, plus an explicit 'Trigger em' section with keywords. Both components are well-defined.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms including both Portuguese and English variations ('teste', 'test'), specific tools ('Playwright', 'Vitest', 'Jest'), and common testing concepts ('coverage', 'mock', 'fixture', 'E2E', 'regressao'). These are terms users would naturally use when requesting testing help.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive with clear niche in testing/QA domain. The specific tool mentions (Playwright, Vitest, Jest) and testing-specific terminology (E2E, coverage, mock, fixture) create a clear boundary that would not conflict with general coding or documentation skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Implementation

42%

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

The skill provides a well-structured overview of QA responsibilities and testing strategy with good progressive disclosure, but critically lacks executable code examples that would make it actionable. It reads more like a policy document than a practical skill guide, describing what should be done without showing how to do it with concrete test code.

Suggestions

Add executable code examples for each test type (unit test with Vitest/Jest, component test, E2E test with Playwright) showing actual test syntax and patterns

Include specific commands for running tests, checking coverage, and common CLI operations (e.g., 'npx vitest run --coverage')

Add a validation workflow with explicit checkpoints: run tests -> check coverage threshold -> review failures -> fix or document gaps -> proceed

Remove or condense the 'Codigo Limpo' section which doesn't add QA-specific value and the verbose governance references at the top

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundant sections (e.g., 'Quando Usar/Nao Usar' could be tighter, 'Codigo Limpo' section adds little value for a QA skill). Some governance references at the top add overhead without immediate actionability.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill lacks concrete, executable code examples. It describes what to do ('escrever testes unitarios para hooks, stores e utils') but provides no actual test code, no specific commands, no copy-paste ready examples for Vitest, Jest, or Playwright.

1 / 3

Workflow Clarity

There's a checklist and handoff section providing some sequence, but the multi-step testing workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints. No feedback loops for test failures or retry patterns are defined.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with clear sections and a single-level reference to 'docs/skill-guides/qa-testing.md' for detailed examples. Navigation is straightforward with well-organized headers.

3 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
felvieira/claude-skills-fv
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.