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.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:fernandezbaptiste/claude-code-skills --skill qa-expert93
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
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 QA testing capabilities with explicit 'Use when' guidance. It includes domain-specific terminology (P0-P4, OWASP, Google Testing Standards) that creates clear distinctiveness, and covers natural trigger terms users would employ when seeking QA assistance. The description is comprehensive without being overly verbose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
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.' Also mentions specific standards (Google Testing Standards, OWASP) and concrete targets (90% coverage). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both what (comprehensive QA testing processes, test strategies, test cases, bug tracking, metrics, reports) AND when ('Use when creating test strategies, writing test cases...') with clear trigger guidance at the start. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'QA testing', 'test strategies', 'test cases', 'test plans', 'bugs', 'quality metrics', 'progress reports', 'security testing', 'coverage'. Good coverage of terms a user seeking QA help would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused on QA/testing processes with distinct triggers like 'P0-P4 classification', 'Google Testing Standards', 'OWASP security testing', 'QA team handoffs'. Unlikely to conflict with general coding or documentation skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, highly actionable skill with excellent workflow clarity and progressive disclosure. The main weakness is moderate verbosity - some sections explain concepts Claude already knows (severity classifications, OWASP categories) and include generic guidance that could be inferred. The skill excels at providing concrete, executable patterns and clear navigation to detailed references.
Suggestions
Remove or condense the severity classification definitions (P0-P4) since Claude understands these concepts - keep only project-specific thresholds
Trim the OWASP coverage targets list to just reference the external document rather than listing all categories inline
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation (e.g., explaining what P0-P4 means when Claude knows severity classifications, listing all OWASP categories). Some sections could be tightened, particularly the 'Adapting for Your Project' section which provides generic guidance Claude could infer. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable commands (python scripts/init_qa_project.py), specific file paths, clear templates, and copy-paste ready patterns. The Common Patterns section gives step-by-step workflows that are immediately actionable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints. The Ground Truth Principle section emphasizes critical validation steps, and workflows include feedback loops (e.g., 'Update CSV immediately after EACH test', auto-escalate P0 bugs). Quality gates provide clear pass/fail criteria. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with clear overview and well-signaled one-level-deep references. The Reference Documents section cleanly points to detailed materials (day1_onboarding.md, master_qa_prompt.md, etc.) without nesting. Content is appropriately split between overview and detailed references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.