Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios/.claude/skills/team-qa/SKILL.md
team-qa
Orchestrate the QA team through a full testing cycle. Coordinates qa-lead (strategy + test plan) and qa-tester (test case writing + bug reporting) to produce a complete QA package for a sprint or feature. Covers: test plan generation, test case writing, smoke check gate, manual QA execution, and sign-off report.
- Source repository stars
- 23,609
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 1
- Last source update
- 2026-05-21
- Source checked
- 2026-08-05
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
1. If --review [mode] was passed as an argument, use that mode. 2. Else read production/review-mode.txt — use whatever is written there. 3. Else default to lean.
Not for
- Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
- Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| 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
Inspect first. Install second.
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/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill ".claude/skills/team-qa"Inspect the Agent Skill "team-qa" from https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios/blob/984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375f/.claude/skills/team-qa/SKILL.md at commit 984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375f. 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
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Phase 0: Resolve Review Mode
1. If --review [mode] was passed as an argument, use that mode. 2. Else read production/review-mode.txt — use whatever is written there. 3. Else default to lean.
If --review [mode] was passed as an argument, use that mode.Else read production/review-mode.txt — use whatever is written there.Else default to lean. - 02
How to Delegate
Use the Task tool to spawn each team member as a subagent: - subagenttype: qa-lead — Strategy, planning, classification, sign-off - subagenttype: qa-tester — Test case writing and bug report writing
subagenttype: qa-lead — Strategy, planning, classification, sign-offsubagenttype: qa-tester — Test case writing and bug report writingUse the Task tool to spawn each team member as a subagent: - subagenttype: qa-lead — Strategy, planning, classification, sign-off - subagenttype: qa-tester — Test case writing and bug report writing - 03
Phase 1: Load Context
Before doing anything else, gather the full scope:
Detect the current sprint or feature scope from the argument:If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g., sprint-03): Glob production/sprints/ for files matching [sprint-identifier].md. Read the matched file. If multiple match, use the most recently modified.If argument is feature: [system-name]: glob story files tagged for that system - 04
Phase 2: QA Strategy (qa-lead)
Spawn qa-lead via Task to review all in-scope stories and produce a QA strategy.
Read each story fileClassify each story by type: Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/DataIdentify which stories require automated test evidence vs. manual QA - 05
Phase 3: Test Plan Generation
Using the strategy from Phase 2, produce a structured test plan document.
Scope: sprint/feature name, story count, datesStory Classification Table: from Phase 2 strategyAutomated Test Requirements: which stories need test files, expected paths in tests/
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Reads files
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g., `sprint-03`): Glob `production/sprints/` for files matching `*[sprint-identifier]*.md`. Read the matched file. If multiple match, use the most recently modified.Reads files
The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.
Read each story fileEvidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 87/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 23,609 | 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
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios
- Skill path
- .claude/skills/team-qa/SKILL.md
- Commit
- 984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375f
- License
- MIT
- Collected
- 2026-08-05
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
When this skill is invoked, orchestrate the QA team through a structured testing cycle.
Decision Points: At each phase transition, use AskUserQuestion to present
the user with the subagent's proposals as selectable options. Write the agent's
full analysis in conversation, then capture the decision with concise labels.
The user must approve before moving to the next phase.
Phase 0: Resolve Review Mode
- If
--review [mode]was passed as an argument, use that mode. - Else read
production/review-mode.txt— use whatever is written there. - Else default to
lean.
Modes:
full— spawn all director and lead gates as describedlean— skip director gates unless they are PHASE-GATE type (CD-PHASE-GATE, TD-PHASE-GATE, PR-PHASE-GATE, AD-PHASE-GATE)solo— skip all director gate spawning entirely; run the skill without any agent gates
Store the resolved mode for use in all subsequent phases.
Team Composition
- qa-lead — QA strategy, test plan generation, story classification, sign-off report
- qa-tester — Test case writing, bug report writing, manual QA documentation
How to Delegate
Use the Task tool to spawn each team member as a subagent:
subagent_type: qa-lead— Strategy, planning, classification, sign-offsubagent_type: qa-tester— Test case writing and bug report writing
Always provide full context in each agent's prompt (story file paths, QA plan path, scope constraints). Launch independent qa-tester tasks in parallel where possible (e.g., multiple stories in Phase 5 can be scaffolded simultaneously).
Pipeline
Phase 1: Load Context
Before doing anything else, gather the full scope:
-
Detect the current sprint or feature scope from the argument:
- If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g.,
sprint-03): Globproduction/sprints/for files matching*[sprint-identifier]*.md. Read the matched file. If multiple match, use the most recently modified. - If argument is
feature: [system-name]: glob story files tagged for that system - If no argument: read
production/session-state/active.mdandproduction/sprint-status.yaml(if present) to infer the active sprint
- If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g.,
-
Read
production/stage.txtto confirm the current project phase. -
Count stories found and report to the user:
"QA cycle starting for [sprint/feature]. Found [N] stories. Current stage: [stage]. Ready to begin QA strategy?"
Phase 2: QA Strategy (qa-lead)
Spawn qa-lead via Task to review all in-scope stories and produce a QA strategy.
Prompt the qa-lead to:
-
Read each story file
-
Classify each story by type: Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/Data
-
Identify which stories require automated test evidence vs. manual QA
-
Flag any stories with missing acceptance criteria or missing test evidence that would block QA
-
Estimate manual QA effort (number of test sessions needed)
-
Before assessing smoke status, check for an existing smoke check report: Glob
production/qa/smoke-*.mdand read the most recently modified file (if found). If a report exists, use its verdict and findings directly — do not re-interview the user. If no report exists, note: "No prior smoke check report found — run/smoke-check sprintbefore proceeding." and set smoke check status to UNKNOWN (treat as PASS WITH WARNINGS for the purpose of continuing). Produce a smoke check verdict: PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS [list] / FAIL [list of failures] / UNKNOWN (no report found) -
Produce a strategy summary table and smoke check result:
Story Type Automated Required Manual Required Blocker? Smoke Check: [PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS / FAIL / UNKNOWN] — [source:
production/qa/smoke-[date].mdor "no report found"] — [details if not PASS]
If the smoke check result is FAIL, the qa-lead must list the failures prominently. QA cannot proceed past the strategy phase with a failed smoke check.
Present the qa-lead's full strategy to the user, then use AskUserQuestion:
question: "QA Strategy Review"
options:
- "Looks good — proceed to test plan"
- "Adjust story types before proceeding"
- "Skip blocked stories and proceed with the rest"
- "Smoke check failed — fix issues and re-run /team-qa"
- "Cancel — resolve blockers first"
If smoke check FAIL: do not proceed to Phase 3. Surface the failures from the smoke check report and stop. The user must fix them, re-run /smoke-check sprint, and then re-run /team-qa.
If smoke check UNKNOWN: surface a warning — "No smoke check report found. Recommend running /smoke-check sprint before QA. Proceeding with caution."
If smoke check PASS WITH WARNINGS: note the warnings for the sign-off report and continue.
If blockers are present: list them explicitly. The user may choose to skip blocked stories or cancel the cycle.
Phase 3: Test Plan Generation
Using the strategy from Phase 2, produce a structured test plan document.
The test plan should cover:
- Scope: sprint/feature name, story count, dates
- Story Classification Table: from Phase 2 strategy
- Automated Test Requirements: which stories need test files, expected paths in
tests/ - Manual QA Scope: which stories need manual walkthrough and what to validate
- Out of Scope: what is explicitly not being tested this cycle and why
- Entry Criteria: what must be true before QA can begin. Always include: (1) Smoke check PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS report exists at
production/qa/smoke-*.md, (2) build is stable (no crashes on launch), (3) all Must Have stories have Status: in-progress or done inproduction/sprint-status.yaml. Add any sprint-specific criteria beyond these. - Exit Criteria: what constitutes a completed QA cycle (all stories PASS or FAIL with bugs filed)
Ask: "May I write the QA plan to production/qa/qa-plan-[sprint]-[date].md?"
Write only after receiving approval.
Phase 4: Test Case Writing (qa-tester)
Smoke check is performed as part of Phase 2 (QA Strategy). If the smoke check returned FAIL in Phase 2, the cycle was stopped there. This phase only runs when the Phase 2 smoke check was PASS, PASS WITH WARNINGS, or UNKNOWN.
For each story requiring manual QA (Visual/Feel, UI, Integration without automated tests):
Spawn qa-tester via Task for each story (run in parallel where possible), providing:
- The story file path
- The relevant section of the QA plan for that story
- The GDD acceptance criteria for the system being tested (if available)
- Instructions to write detailed test cases covering all acceptance criteria
Each test case set should include:
- Preconditions: game state required before testing begins
- Steps: numbered, unambiguous actions
- Expected Result: what should happen
- Actual Result: field left blank for the tester to fill in
- Pass/Fail: field left blank
Present the test cases to the user for review before execution. Group by story.
Use AskUserQuestion per story group (batched 3-4 at a time):
question: "Test cases ready for [Story Group]. Review before manual QA begins?"
options:
- "Approved — begin manual QA for these stories"
- "Revise test cases for [story name]"
- "Skip manual QA for [story name] — not ready"
Phase 5: Manual QA Execution
Walk through each story in the approved manual QA list.
Batch stories into groups of 3-4 and use AskUserQuestion for each:
question: "Manual QA — [Story Title]\n[brief description of what to test]"
options:
- "PASS — all acceptance criteria verified"
- "PASS WITH NOTES — minor issues found (describe after)"
- "FAIL — criteria not met (describe after)"
- "BLOCKED — cannot test yet (reason)"
After each FAIL result: use AskUserQuestion to collect the failure description, then spawn qa-tester via Task to write a formal bug report in production/qa/bugs/.
Bug report naming: BUG-[NNN]-[short-slug].md (increment NNN from existing bugs in the directory).
After collecting all results, summarize:
- Stories PASS: [count]
- Stories PASS WITH NOTES: [count]
- Stories FAIL: [count] — bugs filed: [IDs]
- Stories BLOCKED: [count]
Phase 6: QA Sign-Off Report
Spawn qa-lead via Task to produce the sign-off report using all results from Phases 4–6.
The sign-off report format:
## QA Sign-Off Report: [Sprint/Feature]
**Date**: [date]
### Test Coverage Summary
| Story | Type | Auto Test | Manual QA | Result |
|-------|------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| [title] | Logic | PASS | — | PASS |
| [title] | Visual | — | PASS | PASS |
### Bugs Found
| ID | Story | Severity | Status |
|----|-------|----------|--------|
| BUG-001 | [story] | S2 | Open |
### Verdict: APPROVED / APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS / NOT APPROVED
**Conditions** (if any): [list what must be fixed before the build advances]
### Next Step
[guidance based on verdict]
Verdict rules:
- APPROVED: All stories PASS or PASS WITH NOTES; no S1/S2 bugs open
- APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: S3/S4 bugs open, or PASS WITH NOTES issues documented; no S1/S2 bugs
- NOT APPROVED: Any S1/S2 bugs open; or stories FAIL without documented workaround
Next step guidance by verdict:
- APPROVED: "Build is ready for the next phase. Run
/gate-checkto validate advancement." - APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: "Resolve conditions before advancing. S3/S4 bugs may be deferred to polish."
- NOT APPROVED: "Resolve S1/S2 bugs and re-run
/team-qaor targeted manual QA before advancing."
Ask: "May I write this QA sign-off report to production/qa/qa-signoff-[sprint]-[date].md?"
Write only after receiving approval.
Error Recovery Protocol
If any spawned agent (via Task) returns BLOCKED, errors, or cannot complete:
- Surface immediately: Report "[AgentName]: BLOCKED — [reason]" to the user before continuing to dependent phases
- Assess dependencies: Check whether the blocked agent's output is required by subsequent phases. If yes, do not proceed past that dependency point without user input.
- Offer options via AskUserQuestion with choices:
- Skip this agent and note the gap in the final report
- Retry with narrower scope
- Stop here and resolve the blocker first
- Always produce a partial report — output whatever was completed. Never discard work because one agent blocked.
Common blockers:
- Input file missing (story not found, GDD absent) → redirect to the skill that creates it
- ADR status is Proposed → do not implement; run
/architecture-decisionfirst - Scope too large → split into two stories via
/create-stories - Conflicting instructions between ADR and story → surface the conflict, do not guess
Output
A summary covering: stories in scope, smoke check result, manual QA results, bugs filed (with IDs and severities), and the final APPROVED / APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS / NOT APPROVED verdict.
Verdict: COMPLETE — QA cycle finished. Verdict: BLOCKED — smoke check failed or critical blocker prevented cycle completion; partial report produced.
Session State Update
After the final phase completes (sign-off report written or BLOCKED verdict reached), silently append to production/session-state/active.md:
<!-- QA RUN: [date] | Sprint: [sprint identifier or "ad-hoc"] | Verdict: [PASS/FAIL/CONCERNS] | Report: production/qa/qa-[date].md -->
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
respira-press/agent-skills-wordpress
woocommerce-health-check
Use when the user says 'why is my checkout broken', 'audit my woocommerce store', 'cart problems woocommerce', or 'losing sales woocommerce'. Diagnoses checkout and cart failures, AJAX mismatches, caching conflicts, payment gateway setup, and SSL enforcement.
equinor/neqsim
neqsim-autonomous-investigation
Autonomous investigation loop for operational and engineering anomalies — turns an agent from 'told what to look for' into 'discovers relationships and hypotheses on its own'. USE WHEN: solving a PEPR action, root-cause, or operational study where the symptom, driver, or important relationships are NOT given up front. Runs an observe -> hypothesize -> predict -> test -> discriminate loop, using neqsim.process.diagnostics.RelationshipGraph for unsupervised lead-lag relationship discovery across h
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
cro
When the user wants to optimize, improve, or increase conversions on any marketing page or form — including homepage, landing pages, pricing pages, feature pages, lead capture forms, or contact forms. Also use when the user says 'CRO,' 'conversion rate optimization,' 'this page isn't converting,' 'improve conversions,' 'why isn't this page working,' 'my landing page sucks,' 'form abandonment,' 'nobody's converting,' 'low conversion rate,' or 'this page needs work.' Use this even if the user just
coreyhaines31/marketingskills
ab-testing
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program