qa-interaction
QA Interaction Agent. 사용자 인터랙션 테스트 계획 및 Playwright E2E 테스트 작성을 담당합니다. UX/UI 명세 기반의 상세한 테스트 시나리오를 설계합니다.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:shaul1991/shaul-agents-plugin --skill qa-interactionOverall
score
61%
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
33%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description identifies a clear domain (QA interaction testing with Playwright) and mentions specific activities, but critically lacks explicit trigger guidance ('Use when...') which limits Claude's ability to know when to select this skill. The Korean-only text may also limit discoverability for English-speaking users who need this capability.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'Playwright 테스트', 'E2E 테스트 작성', 'UI 테스트 자동화', 'browser automation', 'end-to-end testing'
Include both Korean and English trigger terms to improve discoverability across language contexts
List more specific concrete actions such as 'selector 작성', 'page object 생성', 'assertion 구현' to better differentiate from generic QA skills
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (QA/testing) and mentions specific actions like 'Playwright E2E 테스트 작성' and 'UX/UI 명세 기반의 상세한 테스트 시나리오 설계', but could be more comprehensive about what specific testing capabilities are included. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what the skill does (test planning and Playwright E2E test writing) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords like 'Playwright', 'E2E 테스트', 'UX/UI', '테스트 시나리오', but missing common variations users might say like 'end-to-end testing', 'browser testing', 'automation', 'test cases', or English equivalents. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Mentions Playwright specifically which helps distinguish from other testing skills, but 'QA' and 'interaction testing' are somewhat generic and could overlap with other testing or QA-related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides strong, actionable Playwright test patterns with executable code examples covering multiple testing scenarios. However, it's overly verbose for a skill file, mixing reference documentation with instructional content. The workflow for creating and validating tests could be more explicit with feedback loops for test failures.
Suggestions
Split detailed test patterns (form, accessibility, responsive) into separate reference files and link from a concise overview
Add explicit validation workflow: write test -> run -> debug failures -> verify coverage
Remove the '담당 업무' section as it duplicates what the code examples already demonstrate
Add a troubleshooting section for common Playwright test failures and how to resolve them
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some redundant explanations (e.g., listing responsibilities that are self-evident from the code examples). The extensive code examples are valuable but could be more selective. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable Playwright code examples that are copy-paste ready, with specific test patterns for various scenarios (forms, accessibility, responsive design). Commands section includes concrete CLI examples. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The test scenario template provides a clear sequence with checkpoints, but the overall document lacks explicit validation steps for the test writing process itself. No feedback loops for when tests fail or need debugging. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is organized into logical sections but is monolithic - all patterns are inline rather than referenced. The document could benefit from splitting detailed patterns into separate files with clear navigation from an overview. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
91%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 |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | 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.