CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

qa-acceptance

Produce QA acceptance criteria and a manual validation plan for a feature change — golden path, edge cases, error states, performance limits, and explicit pass/fail evidence.

73

Quality

91%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

100%

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

A tight, highly actionable instruction-only skill with a clear QA validation workflow, explicit evidence and waiver checkpoints, and clean self-contained organization.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and directive with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows (e.g. it never explains what QA is), so every token earns its place per the level-3 anchor.

3 / 3

Actionability

It provides a concrete Given/when/then template with a worked example, eight specific coverage areas with concrete cases (0-row CSV export, 409 conflict, 404), and a named three-section handoff format — fully actionable guidance, not the vague level-1 or pseudocode level-2 anchor.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The process is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops ('Looks good to me' without evidence is not a pass; a failing criterion blocks unless waived with a tracked follow-up; adding a criterion mid-pass restarts the pass), matching the level-3 anchor with explicit checkpoints and error-recovery loops.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

It is a self-contained, well-sectioned instruction skill with no external references and no nested/deep references, so per the guideline for skills with no need for external references it earns 3 on well-organized sections alone.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Description

82%

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

A specific, third-person description with strong natural trigger terms and a clear distinct niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 2.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when a feature change is heading to QA, a reviewer must verify a user-visible PR, a release candidate needs a pre-cut smoke pass, or a postmortem requires a regression check.'

Surface a few more common user variations of the trigger (e.g. 'smoke pass', 'regression check', 'QA pass') to broaden natural-keyword coverage.

Keep the current concrete enumeration of coverage areas — it is what earns the specificity score and should not be trimmed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

It names a concrete deliverable ('Produce QA acceptance criteria and a manual validation plan') and enumerates multiple specific coverage areas (golden path, edge cases, error states, performance limits, pass/fail evidence), matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor rather than the 'names domain and some actions' level 2.

3 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is clear, but there is no explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause; the only 'when' signal ('for a feature change') is implied, so per the guideline a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 2 rather than 3.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'QA acceptance criteria', 'manual validation plan', and 'feature change' are natural terms a user would say when needing this skill, giving good coverage of the level-3 anchor rather than the single-keyword level-2 example.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The QA acceptance / manual validation-plan niche is clearly distinct from unit or contract testing and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill, matching the level-3 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
paperclipai/paperclip
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.