CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

severity-vs-priority-reference

Pure-reference catalog for defect classification: severity (impact on the system / user) vs priority (urgency of fix) on independent axes - the canonical 5-point severity scale (Critical / High / Medium / Low / Trivial), the 5-point priority scale (Immediate / High / Medium / Low / Deferred), the 5x5 matrix with worked S1/P5 and S5/P1 examples, and IEEE 1044-2009 severity classes; plus the full defect lifecycle (ISTQB-canonical states new / open / assigned / fixed / verified / closed / reopened / deferred / rejected / duplicate, allowed and forbidden transitions, tracker vocabulary maps) and the defect-categorisation taxonomies (IEEE 1044 anomaly classification, ISTQB CTAL-TA root-cause categories, Orthogonal Defect Classification) in references. Use when triaging or classifying a defect, configuring a tracker's severity/priority/state fields, reviewing a bug report's classification, or running root-cause analysis.

Quality

83%

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

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-structured reference body with anchored scales, a genuinely useful 5x5 matrix, worked examples, and clean separation of lifecycle/taxonomy material into real, well-linked bundle files. Its main weakness is redundancy: the severity-vs-priority distinction is explained in four overlapping sections that could be consolidated into one, tightening token use without losing content.

Suggestions

Merge "Why they must be separate axes", "Common confusions", and "Anti-patterns" into a single section - they restate the same principle three times; keep the 5x5 matrix and one table of confusions/fixes.

Drop the S1/P5 and S5/P1 detail from the body (or the description) - the full worked examples are duplicated between the two.

Link references/tracker-vocabulary-map.md from the "Configuring a tracker" section where its vocabulary mapping is needed, not only from the final References list.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The two-axis principle is restated four times - Overview ("two independent axes, not synonyms"), "Why they must be separate axes", "Common confusions", and "Anti-patterns" - with overlapping content across those tables, and the S1/P5 and S5/P1 examples repeat the description verbatim. The scales, matrix, and worked example earn their tokens, but the redundancy is more than minor.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, directly usable guidance throughout: anchored severity and priority scales with definitions and examples, a 7-step classification procedure, a fully worked example (CSV export -> S4/P2 with specific Jira field values), and a per-tracker field configuration table. For an instruction-only reference skill, the specific examples cover the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

"How to use" is a clear numbered sequence with checkpoints (matrix cell check requiring recorded rationale for rare/unusual cells, "Confirm you did not collapse the axes", priority-change logging on re-triage). Not 5 because there is no error-recovery loop: "Limitations" notes reviewer disagreement on S2/S3 boundary cases is normal but provides no resolution step.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

All three bundle files exist and are clearly signaled one level deep at point of use for lifecycle and taxonomy. Minor gap: references/tracker-vocabulary-map.md is only surfaced in the final References list rather than from the "Configuring a tracker" section where it applies, which instead points to the external bug-tracker-workflow skill.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

83%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 is information-dense and explicitly covers both what the catalog contains and when to use it, with concrete trigger phrases and named standards. It is longer than necessary - the inline enumerations of lifecycle states and taxonomy names could be trimmed without losing triggering power.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates concrete contents - "the canonical 5-point severity scale (Critical / High / Medium / Low / Trivial)", "the 5x5 matrix with worked S1/P5 and S5/P1 examples", "IEEE 1044-2009 severity classes", and the full lifecycle state list - but the long parenthetical enumerations of states and taxonomy names pad the description; a tighter version would preserve the coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both "what" (a pure-reference catalog whose contents are enumerated in detail) and "when" ("Use when triaging or classifying a defect, configuring a tracker's severity/priority/state fields, reviewing a bug report's classification, or running root-cause analysis") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when triaging or classifying a defect, configuring a tracker's severity/priority/state fields, reviewing a bug report's classification, or running root-cause analysis" covers natural phrases users would say (triaging, classifying a defect, bug report, root-cause analysis), though common synonyms like "bug ticket", "issue tracker", or "escalation" are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (severity vs priority on independent axes for defect classification) with distinct triggers, and naming companion skills aids disambiguation; minor overlap risk remains with tracker-configuration or general bug-tracker skills via "configuring a tracker's severity/priority/state fields".

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

testland/qa

Path

plugins/qa-defect-management/skills/severity-vs-priority-reference/SKILL.md

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.