Best for
- Use this skill to turn a broad "test every feature in this app" request into a controlled loop with one source of truth. Anchor every feature to code, track expected behavior in a canonical spreadsheet, run tests agains…
majiayu000/spellbook/skills/app-user-story-qa/SKILL.md
End-to-end app feature inventory and user-story testing workflow with a canonical tracker. Use when the user asks to audit every feature, derive expected behavior from code, test user journeys, or explicitly fix and retest documented UX or logistical defects.
Decision brief
End-to-end app feature inventory and user-story testing workflow with a canonical tracker.
Compatibility matrix
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/majiayu000/spellbook --skill "skills/app-user-story-qa"Inspect the Agent Skill "app-user-story-qa" from https://github.com/majiayu000/spellbook/blob/01c5d88b0139a80ac38bfe7206ea99f28b0fc999/skills/app-user-story-qa/SKILL.md at commit 01c5d88b0139a80ac38bfe7206ea99f28b0fc999. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
Map all user-visible surfaces first:
Use this skill to turn a broad "test every feature in this app" request into a controlled loop with one source of truth. Anchor every feature to code, track expected behavior in a canonical spreadsheet, run tests against each user story, and classify failures. Apply fixes only w…
Use planfirst for most runs. Switch to clarifyfirst only when the app boundary, writable checkout, production risk, or acceptance criteria are unclear enough that a wrong assumption would waste substantial work.
Select one mode before editing production code:
Do not create scattered notes or duplicate trackers. One canonical tracker is the audit log.
Permission review
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Read applicable repo instructions such as `AGENTS.md`, `README`, architecture docs, and feature entrypoints.Evidence record
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 85/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 249 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Use this skill to turn a broad "test every feature in this app" request into a controlled loop with one source of truth. Anchor every feature to code, track expected behavior in a canonical spreadsheet, run tests against each user story, and classify failures. Apply fixes only when the current request explicitly authorizes them.
Use plan_first for most runs. Switch to clarify_first only when the app boundary, writable checkout, production risk, or acceptance criteria are unclear enough that a wrong assumption would waste substantial work.
Before editing:
AGENTS.md, README, architecture docs, and feature entrypoints.Select one mode before editing production code:
report_only is the default for audit, inventory, test, diagnose, or tracker requests. It may create or update the requested canonical tracker and run tests, but it must not change product behavior.apply_fixes requires the current user request to explicitly ask for fixes. It covers only defects already reproduced and classified within the agreed app boundary. Earlier approval and a generic request to "test everything" do not authorize fixes.If the mode is ambiguous, use report_only and record proposed fixes in the tracker.
Direct actions:
apply_fixes only, fix narrow in-scope logistical or UX defects and add focused coverage when user-observable behavior changes.Escalate before:
Evidence-backed pushback:
Feedback loop:
report_only.Create or update exactly one tracker. Prefer a real spreadsheet when the runtime supports it; otherwise use a CSV and treat it as the canonical spreadsheet. Do not scatter status across side reports.
Use these columns:
Feature ID,Surface,Feature / capability,User story,Expected behavior based on code,Code anchors,Initial test approach,Initial test command or route,Status,Test result,Errors,Fix status,Retest result,Notes
Rules:
F001, F002.Use a small, consistent status set:
Not TestedPassedFailed - ProductFailed - UXFailed - LogisticalFailed - Test InfraBlocked - EnvFixedPassed after fixUse Failed - Logistical for repo-owned setup, script, port, packaging, or local workflow defects that block a valid user path.
Use Blocked - Env for local machine issues such as missing credentials, occupied services outside the repo, stale PATH binaries, or unavailable optional runtimes. Do not "fix" the user's environment unless they explicitly ask.
Classify every failure before fixing:
Product: implemented behavior violates the user story or loses data.UX: behavior works but the user path is confusing, brittle, or poorly surfaced.Logistical: scripts, ports, setup, packaging, or local workflow make valid behavior hard to exercise.Test Infra: the test itself is flaky, racy, or asserts the wrong contract.Env: external setup blocks execution and is not a repo defect.Fix only defects that are in scope for the task. Record out-of-scope defects in the tracker with clear rationale.
Map all user-visible surfaces first:
For each feature, record the user story as:
As a <user>, I want <capability>, so <outcome>.
Keep stories practical. Do not create rows for private helpers unless the user can observe the behavior through a surface.
For every tracker row, choose the strongest feasible evidence:
Record the command, route, or manual steps in the tracker. Fresh output from the current session is required before marking a row passed.
In report_only, record the reproduced defect, evidence, and proposed fix, then continue testing without editing production code.
In apply_fixes, state the exact defect and files being changed before editing. Keep fixes narrow:
Stop and re-evaluate after three failed attempts on the same defect.
After each fix:
Fix status and Retest result.Errors so the tracker remains an audit log.Before completion, run the repo's required formatting, build, typecheck, lint, and test commands when practical.
Finish only when:
Failed row is fixed and retested in apply_fixes, or is explicitly recorded as proposed, out of scope, or blocked with evidence in report_only;If the repo has existing dirty work that is not yours, mention the isolated worktree or scope boundary in the final answer.
Alternatives
AI-Unified-Process/marketplace
Creates Vaadin Browserless server-side unit tests for Vaadin views covering navigation, component interactions, form validation, grid operations, and notifications. Use when the user asks to "write Browserless tests", "write Vaadin UI unit tests", "unit test a Vaadin view without a browser", "create view tests with the official Vaadin testing framework", or mentions Browserless testing, SpringBrowserlessTest, browserless-test-junit6, UI Unit Testing, or server-side Vaadin testing.
mgiovani/cc-arsenal
Multi-agent review team: architecture, security, performance, testing, style, docs/UX, plus an adversary that cross-examines the other 6, for security-sensitive, architectural, or large PRs (15+ files) where a single-agent pass risks missing cross-cutting issues. Use for auth/payments/PII changes, schema/pattern changes, compliance sign-off, or when asked to 'get the review team on this' / 'multi-agent review' / 'thorough review before merge'. For a standard PR or a quick pre-merge check, use /r
event4u-app/agent-config
Use when writing Playwright E2E tests — browser automation, visual regression testing, Page Objects, fixtures, and reliable test patterns.
JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills
Design AI evals that catch regressions before users do: rubrics, test cases, failure modes, acceptance gates, and AI-SPEC artifacts.