testland/defect-escape-taxonomy
Use when a defect has been confirmed in production and the team must name which class of gap let it through before deciding what to build. Classifies it as a test, process or tooling gap and one of thirteen sub-patterns at the earliest layer that should have caught it, with the fix, without blame.
89%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Passed
No findings from the security scan
escape-defect-document-template.mdreferences/
Escape defect document template
Deep reference for defect-escape-taxonomy SKILL.md. Consult when writing up a classified escape - the full per-defect document shape.
One markdown document per escaped defect. Store them together under a
stable directory (for example docs/escape-defects/) with a
date-prefixed, slugified filename, so the set can be read as a trend.
# Escape defect: <one-line summary of the failure>
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Defect ID | #1234 |
| First production observation | 2026-05-02T09:14Z |
| Days in production before fix | 2 |
| Users affected (estimated) | ~340 |
| Fix commit | def5678 |
| Introducing commit | abc1234 |
| Escape category | test gap |
| Sub-pattern | edge case not exercised |
## What happened
Two or three paragraphs. Behavior of the system, in order. No attribution.
## Why it escaped
The checking activity that was supposed to catch this, and the standing
state of that activity. Systems as grammatical subjects throughout.
## Prevention asset
### Proposed test or gate
<actual code or config diff>
### Where it lives
<repository path>
### What it verifies
Names the introducing commit and states when this check would have failed
against it.
## Process changes
Process-gap findings only. Omit the section otherwise.
## Open questions
Anything the available evidence does not settle, stated as a question.The Prevention asset section is load-bearing. If it is empty or generic, the document is not finished.