Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

qa-start

Sequenced launcher that bootstraps QA on a project with no QA in place. Chains qa-project-context → test-strategy → test-planning in one guided run, then executes available checks and records evidence. Use when: "set up QA on a new project," "QA from scratch," "no QA exists yet," "/qa-start." Not for: onboarding a QA engineer to an existing team with existing tests — use qa-project-bootstrap. Not for: "which skill do I use" with no clear match — use qa-do. Related: qa-project-context, test-strategy, test-planning, qa-project-bootstrap, qa-do.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Works withPlaywright
See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md8.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

<objective> A sequenced launcher for bootstrapping QA where none exists. Inspect the repository, capture available context, choose the first critical behavior, and execute its checks. Use `qa-project-context` → `test-strategy` → `test-planning` to keep the decisions explicit, then deliver test evidence and the next concrete gap alongside the planning artifacts. </objective>

When to Use This

Reach for qa-start whenever the answer to "where do we start with QA?" is unclear and no QA foundation exists yet:

  • A brand-new project with no test infrastructure.
  • Joining an existing codebase that has no QA setup at all — old code, but quality work was never formalized. Still qa-start, not qa-project-bootstrap (that one is for joining a team that already has tests).
  • Rebooting QA after neglect — tests deleted, coverage collapsed, no strategy. You are rebooting QA from the foundation up.

If the codebase already has a real test suite and you are a QA engineer ramping onto the team, use qa-project-bootstrap instead.

Quick Route

Pick your entry point — skip any step whose artifact already exists.

SituationStart at
No QA at all (no context file, no strategy, no plan)Step 1
.agents/qa-project-context.md already populatedSkip Step 1 — invoke test-strategy (Step 2)
Context file AND strategy document both existSkip Steps 1 and 2 — invoke test-planning (Step 3)
All three done — what next?After Step 3
A QA engineer ramping onto an existing team with existing testsNot this skill — see qa-project-bootstrap

Step 1: Capture Project Context

Skill: qa-project-context

Creates .agents/qa-project-context.md in your project root. That file records your tech stack, test frameworks, CI/CD pipeline, environments, coverage goals, risk areas, and team structure. Every later skill reads it, so it never asks you the same questions twice.

What to do: Invoke qa-project-context. Start discovery with the repo and existing task, then write the file. Record unknown decisions explicitly. Ask only for a missing answer that changes the next action; continue useful checks when optional context is absent.

Done when: .agents/qa-project-context.md records observed setup, usable commands, current scope, and unresolved decisions. Do not invent team structure, targets, or credentials.

Step 2: Create the Test Strategy

Skill: test-strategy

Produces a strategy document defining how the project approaches quality: the test pyramid (what proportion of unit, integration, and E2E tests fits your product), entry and exit criteria, tool selection, environment coverage, and quality gates for CI and release.

What to do: Invoke test-strategy once Step 1 is complete. It reads the context file automatically and will not re-ask anything answered there.

Done when: You have a strategy document (e.g. strategy.md) covering test-pyramid rationale, tool choices with justification, quality gates for CI and release, and entry/exit criteria per test type. One page of clear decisions beats a sprawling template.

Step 3: Build the First Test Plan

Skill: test-planning

Translates the strategy into an actionable plan for the first sprint or release. Maps features to test cases, assigns effort, and decides what gets covered first versus deferred.

What to do: Invoke test-planning after Step 2. It consumes the strategy from Step 2 and the context from Step 1. Provide the feature list or sprint scope when prompted.

Done when: You have a test plan (e.g. plan.md) with features mapped to test cases, coverage priorities set, effort estimated, and scope boundaries clear. This is the artifact your team executes against.

Run the First Checks

Inspect the repository before producing planning documents. Use available context to make routine choices and keep the initial strategy and plan proportional to the project. A missing optional context file does not block an authorized local test run.

When the full QA Skills checkout is available, run:

node <qa-skills>/scripts/qa.mjs init --project <project> --wire-agent
node <qa-skills>/scripts/qa.mjs run --project <project> --goal "Check the critical user flow"

init creates a project config without overwriting an existing one. Use --wire-agent when the user wants QA integrated into future coding tasks; it adds a bounded workflow to the project's AGENTS.md, preserving existing instructions. Skip init for a configured project. The host agent must load that project instruction for automatic selection.

Read the selected domain skill and execute its workflow. If there are no tests, author and run the first test for an observed critical behavior; do not present setup as a pass. Retain a real report.html and result.json, including blocked dependencies and unrun flows. A successful smoke check establishes only the behavior that was exercised. See the repository's docs/QA-RUNNER.md for the runner contract.

After Step 3

You now hold the foundation: context, strategy, and a first plan. Next actions depend on your stack — this launcher is not the final step.

  • First automated tests: Use playwright-automation or cypress-automation to write the first E2E tests against your highest-risk flows.
  • CI integration: Use ci-cd-integration to get tests running on every pull request.
  • Tracking quality: Use qa-metrics once the suite runs to define what health looks like and how to measure it over time.

qa-start vs qa-project-bootstrap vs qa-do

The single most common routing confusion, answered in one place:

  • qa-start — bootstrap QA where none exists. New project, or QA was deleted and you are rebooting it. Sequence: context → strategy → first plan. Output is the QA foundation.
  • qa-project-bootstrap — a 30-day ramp for a QA engineer joining an existing team with existing tests. Covers team processes, onboarding timeline, and an audit of the test suite already in place. Use it after a foundation exists, not to create one.
  • qa-do — last-resort router for "which skill do I use?" when nothing clearly matches. If you already know you have no QA, skip it and run qa-start.

A brand-new project with no QA — even on an old codebase — is always qa-start, never qa-project-bootstrap.

Pin as a Manual Command

Re-run anytime from the Claude Code /skills menu.

To pin this skill as a manual-only command, add disable-model-invocation: true to the frontmatter, or set it via skillOverrides in .claude/settings.local.json.

Caveat: in some Claude Code builds disable-model-invocation: true also suppresses the manual slash command (ref anthropics/claude-code#26251). If you still want to invoke /qa-start by hand, set the skillOverrides state to user-invocable-only instead.

Related Skills

  • qa-project-context — Step 1. Captures project setup, tech stack, and quality goals into .agents/qa-project-context.md.
  • test-strategy — Step 2. Defines the testing approach, pyramid, tools, and quality gates.
  • test-planning — Step 3. Builds the first test plan with features mapped to test cases.
  • qa-project-bootstrap — go here instead when a QA engineer is ramping onto an existing team with existing tests; this skill creates the foundation, bootstrap onboards onto one.
  • qa-do — last-resort router when no skill clearly matches; not needed if you already know there is no QA.
  • playwright-automation / cypress-automation — after the plan, write the first E2E tests against your highest-risk flows.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Test for WCAG 2.2 AA compliance with axe-core + Playwright, keyboard navigation audits, screen reader testing, ARIA pattern validation, and legal compliance mapping (ADA, EAA, Section 508). Automated tools catch 30-40% of issues — this skill covers automated and manual testing together. Use when: "accessibility," "a11y," "WCAG," "screen reader," "axe," "keyboard navigation," "ARIA," "ADA compliance." Not for: cookie-consent/GDPR compliance — use compliance-testing; pixel-diff visual regression — use visual-testing. Related: playwright-automation, compliance-testing, visual-testing, ci-cd-integration.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

Goal-driven E2E testing where a browser agent (Playwright MCP / computer-use) reads a natural-language goal and explores the app via the accessibility tree to assert outcomes — no pre-written script. Covers when intent-driven beats scripted, making agent runs repeatable and bounded (pinned model, temperature 0, seeded data, bounded steps, explicit success assertion, snapshot-not-pixel), cost/latency control, the accessibility-tree-first interaction model, CI gating, and graduating a stable run into a scripted Playwright test. Use when: "agentic browser test," "goal-driven browser test," "let an agent explore the app," "natural-language E2E," "browser agent smoke test," "Playwright MCP test." Not for: Writing/maintaining deterministic scripted Playwright tests — that is playwright-automation. Testing your product's OWN LLM features — that is ai-system-testing. Related: playwright-automation, ai-system-testing, exploratory-testing, test-reliability, qa-project-context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

Hybrid fingerprint + LLM pipeline for bug classification, deduplication, and ticket generation. Normalizes CI logs, creates stable fingerprints, clusters near-duplicates, then uses LLM for severity classification and ticket writing. Includes bug reporting templates and severity/priority matrix. Use when: "bug triage," "classify bugs," "failure analysis," "auto-classify," "CI failures," "bug report," "defect template." Not for: runtime self-healing of one flaky locator — use test-reliability. Not for: designing new tests from production telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Related: qa-metrics, qa-dashboard, ci-cd-integration, qa-project-context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

Review EXISTING test code for quality, smells, and testability issues. Detects test smells across six dimensions — readability, reliability, diagnostic value, design, AI-generated, and coverage — analyzes testability of application code, and backs the qualitative smells with mutation testing. Use when: "review my tests," "test quality audit," "test smells," "testability analysis," "are these tests any good." Not for: generating new tests — use `ai-test-generation`. Not for: testing AI features in your product — use `ai-system-testing`. Related: unit-testing, shift-left-testing, coverage-analysis, ai-test-generation.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

Test AI/LLM features that ship in your product. Covers prompt regression testing, response quality evaluation, tool-call validation, hallucination and RAG grounding checks, nondeterministic-output strategies, red-team/safety scans, eval frameworks, and agent-as-target injection (indirect injection via tool output / RAG / scan reports, self-propagating payloads, data exfiltration via an agent) plus a bundled detector for untrusted content. Use when: "test our LLM feature," "prompt regression test," "eval framework," "hallucination test," "RAG grounding," "nondeterministic output," "AI feature testing," "red-team our chatbot," "indirect prompt injection," "agent reading untrusted tool output," "production AI quality." Not for: using AI to generate your own test code — use ai-test-generation. Not for: classifying CI failures with AI — use ai-bug-triage. Not for: EU AI Act / GDPR conformity of an AI feature — use compliance-testing. Not for: canary/flag rollout of an AI feature — use testing-in-production. Related: ai-test-generation, ai-qa-review, api-testing, compliance-testing, security-testing, risk-based-testing, test-data-management.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

Use AI to write NEW test code from specs, PRDs, user stories, code diffs, bug reports, or OpenAPI specs. Staged pipeline: requirements extraction → risk analysis → coverage matrix → scenario generation → oracle design → test code → human review, with guardrails against hallucinated APIs and weak assertions. Use when: "generate tests from spec," "tests from PRD," "tests from user story," "auto-generate test cases," "AI write tests for me." Not for: testing AI/LLM features in your product — use ai-system-testing. Not for: auditing a pre-existing test suite you did not just generate — use ai-qa-review (Step 7 here only reviews tests THIS pipeline produced). Related: playwright-automation, unit-testing, api-testing, qa-project-context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills198Updated Oct 21, 2026

See all skills by petrkindlmann

Report a problem with this skill