1,172 件 ・ 関連度順
概要と使いどころ
Multi-agent, browser-driven QA pass over a branch or PR — scope it, plan it, fan out one subagent per testing area in its own isolated sandbox, compile a severity-ranked markdown report. Use for an "E2E test", "QA pass", "manual test", or "bug bash" request — broader than driving the UI to check one fix (see `playwright`) or reviewing a diff (see `code-review`).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
This skill should be used when establishing comprehensive QA testing processes for any software project. Use when creating test strategies, writing test cases following Google Testing Standards, executing test plans, tracking bugs with P0-P4 classification, calculating quality metrics, or generating progress reports. Includes autonomous execution capability via master prompts and complete documentation templates for third-party QA team handoffs. Implements OWASP security testing and achieves 90% coverage targets.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when the user asks to "QA my conversion tracking before launch", "check my UTMs / pixel / event firing", "set up a tracking pre-flight", or "set the dedup rule so Meta and Google stop double-counting"; builds and fixes the measurement plumbing — conversion-event firing, UTM hygiene, cross-platform dedup rules, attribution-window alignment, and offline/iOS-ATT modeled-gap flags — as a pre-flight checklist plus a UTM/event-spec builder. Not for scoring R1/R2 — that is a scored veto in ad-account-auditor; not for account structure — use campaign-architect. 付费广告转化追踪QA/UTM规范/跨平台去重
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Adversarial Quarto-vs-Beamer parity QA. A critic agent compares the Quarto HTML render to the Beamer PDF benchmark for content/visual parity; a fixer agent applies fixes; loops until APPROVED or two consecutive rounds turn up nothing new (fallback cap 5 rounds). Use when user says "qa the quarto", "check parity", "does the html match the pdf?", "quarto matches beamer?", or after a translate-to-quarto run. Requires both the `.qmd` rendered and a `.pdf` benchmark.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Set up or run design QA gates — token + hardcoded-value lint, automated a11y (axe), contrast, visual regression across variants/states/themes/RTL, and the manual a11y checklist. Use when the user wants CI quality gates, to prevent design regressions, or to QA a component/screen before shipping.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Audits already-rendered UI and Markdown/Obsidian image layout — web app, deck/slide, dashboard, design-system, or Electron/native app — via real-browser/native-app journeys and a Playwright sweep. Use after UI implementation to find typography, overflow, responsive, routing, data-viz, browser-output, or native-shell defects, or to compare a render against a reference. Not for greenfield UI design (use ui-designer) or QA-program setup (use qa-expert).
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
可审计的 agent 团队：BMAD 全自动研发流水线编排器。编排 9 个专业 Agent（PM、架构师、UI Designer、Tech Lead、Scrum Master、Frontend、Backend、QA、DevOps）从需求到部署，每一步都有事件溯源 + 不可绕过门禁 + 确定性 eval——可验证测试真跑、门禁真过。支持单环节切片命令（/boss:plan /review /qa /ship）与无 CLI 纯 Markdown 降级。 Triggers（全流水线）: 'boss mode', '/boss', '全自动开发', '从需求到部署', '帮我做一个', 'build this', 'ship it', '全流程', '自动化开发', '一键开发', 'start a project', 'new feature' Triggers（单环节切片，对存量项目最常用）: - /boss:review — '帮我评审', '代码评审', '技术评审', '看看这段代码有什么问题', '风险评估', 'review this', 'review my PR', 'code review' - /boss:qa — '跑一下测试', '补测试', '检查质量', '测试覆盖够不够', '门禁过了吗', 'run the tests', 'check quality', 'add tests' - /boss:plan — '先出个方案', '写个 PRD', '设计一下架构', 'write a spec', 'plan this feature' - /boss:ship — '可以发布了吗', '部署检查', 'ready to ship', 'deploy checks' Does NOT trigger: - 单文件修改或简单 bug 修复（直接编辑即可） - 纯代码阅读或解释（使用 read 工具） - 已有 pipeline 正在运行时的重复启动 - 极小事（预计 <30 分钟人工可完成、不需要 PRD/架构/门禁记录） Output: 完整项目代码 + PRD/架构/UI/测试/部署文档，写入 .boss/<feature>/ 目录
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Generate a phased delivery orchestration plan for creative-direction-driven work: which skills run when, what locks at which gate, how handoffs occur, and how the cadence implements in the team's tools (Jira, Linear, Notion, Figma, GitHub) with AI agents via MCP and CLI. A temporal map of phases, lock points, handoff specs, gate definitions, and QA verification gates. Distinct from `creative-brief` (static project brief) and `creative-direction` (aesthetic direction). Triggers on integration orchestrator, delivery cadence, project orchestration, when does the brief lock, how to phase creative direction, design-development handoff, QA gate, agent-driven QA, and when a creative-direction project is starting, mid-flight with broken cadence, or integrating AI agents into PM workflow. Does NOT fire for project scoping (use `creative-brief`), aesthetic direction (use `creative-direction`), or general project management without a creative-direction throughline.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Run a single manual tmux-based QA scenario for the todo continuation feature against the real CLI (./pi-test.sh) in an interactive TUI. Captures scrollback, asserts deterministic pass/fail count markers, and cleans up test fixtures. Use only for the manual-qa milestone features.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
QA engineering workflows on top of Playwright. Use when a QA engineer asks to design test cases from a ticket, PRD or acceptance criteria, decide what to automate, write a bug report from a failing test or trace, convert manual test cases (TestRail, Xray, CSV) into Playwright specs with case-ID traceability, or review Playwright test code and pull requests.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Debug, patch, and verify failed Agent QA runs from MCP evidence, artifacts, logs, and local code without hiding product or infrastructure defects.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Triage failed Agent QA runs with MCP evidence, artifacts, logs, fixed failure categories, confidence, and actionable next steps.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Create, edit, validate, and run Agent QA tests, suites, and hooks through MCP or CLI while preserving canonical IDs and schema contracts.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
QA test a live website with Firecrawl browser and scrape evidence. Use when the user wants exploratory QA, form testing, navigation/link checks, responsive checks, performance observations, bug reports, or a pre-launch quality review.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Design CI/CD pipelines that run test suites. Covers GitHub Actions and GitLab CI templates, parallelism and sharding, artifact management, flaky-test quarantine, test-result publishing, coverage quality gates, OIDC keyless deploy, and copy-paste workflows for Playwright, Jest, and multi-stage pipelines. Use when: "CI/CD," "GitHub Actions," "pipeline," "test in CI," "GitLab CI," "continuous integration," "test automation pipeline," "shard tests in CI." Not for: per-test flaky healing at runtime — use test-reliability; go/no-go release decisions and smoke-test checklists — use release-readiness; test-result dashboards and trend reporting — use qa-metrics. Related: playwright-automation, qa-metrics, test-reliability, coverage-analysis, release-readiness.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Produce a risk matrix or heatmap that quantifies what could break by business impact × probability, runs failure mode analysis on the top items, and maps test coverage to risk zones. Includes stakeholder interview frameworks and continuous reassessment. Run this BEFORE test-strategy or test-planning. Use when: "risk assessment," "risk matrix," "risk heatmap," "what could break," "critical paths," "failure modes," "where to focus testing." Not for: multi-quarter QA direction — use test-strategy. Not for: a single sprint/release test plan — use test-planning. Not for: hands-on session-based bug hunting — use exploratory-testing. Related: test-strategy, test-planning, release-readiness, qa-metrics.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Safe-release techniques DURING rollout: feature flags, progressive rollouts, canary analysis, guardrail metrics, production smoke tests, and synthetic users. Bridges QA and SRE practices. Use when: "feature flag testing," "canary deploy," "progressive rollout," "guardrail metrics," "dark launch," "safe rollout." Not for: scheduled probes that run continuously after release — use `synthetic-monitoring`. Not for: designing tests from prod telemetry — use `observability-driven-testing`. Related: release-readiness, synthetic-monitoring, observability-driven-testing, qa-metrics.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
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.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Scheduled probes that run CONTINUOUSLY after release. Covers probe design for critical user journeys, alerting integration, SLA validation, multi-region monitoring, and the boundary between QA and SRE. Use when: "synthetic monitoring," "uptime testing," "scheduled probes," "SLA validation," "availability monitoring," "post-deploy checks." Not for: safe-release techniques during rollout — use testing-in-production. Not for: designing tests from prod telemetry — use observability-driven-testing. Not for: a one-shot post-deploy smoke gate tied to a release — use release-readiness. Related: testing-in-production, release-readiness, performance-testing, qa-metrics.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
World-class character and art style consistency for AI-generated images and videos - ensures visual coherence across series, maintains character identity, and provides rigorous QA before deliveryUse when "character consistency, art style, same character, consistent character, visual continuity, series, turnaround sheet, character sheet, reference image, character bible, style guide, anime character, consistent look, face consistency, outfit consistency, lora training, ip-adapter, flux kontext, visual qa, art quality, generation review, style drift, character drift, character-consistency, art-style, visual-qa, ai-art, image-generation, video-generation, anime, illustration, lora, ip-adapter, flux, midjourney, stable-diffusion" mentioned.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Figma 转 Photoshop (PSD) (Figma → Photoshop (PSD) 设计稿转换 (从业者视角) — 把 Figma 设计文件高保真转换为 Photoshop 分层 PSD, 核心是对齐两个工具的概念/渲染差异, 让产出的设计稿视觉一致. 覆盖: (a) 概念映射 — Figma frame / auto-layout / component / variant / constraint / vector-network / boolean / effect (drop·inner shadow / layer·background blur) / mask / blend mode / gradient / text-engine / color 与 Photoshop artboard / group / smart-object / linked / layer-style / shape-layer / path / clipping·layer mask / blend-mode 的对应关系与不可逆损耗点; (b) 转换方法栈 — 插件直出 PSD / 导出图层 (PNG·SVG) 再重组 / SVG·PDF 桥接 / 手工重建 / Figma REST API + Photoshop UXP·ExtendScript 脚本化, 各法在保真度-可编辑性-工时上的权衡与选型; (c) 保真度 QA — 字体回退与缺字处理 / 颜色空间 (sRGB·ICC profile) / 效果参数对齐 / @Nx·DPI 与栅格化 / 像素 diff 验收; (d) 两种交付目标 — 可编辑分层 PSD vs 像素保真扁平 PSD 的方法选择. 主战场 = Figma Community 插件 + Adobe 官方文档/论坛 + 设计交付 (design handoff) 实践 + 设计师社区. 不含: PSD→Figma 反向转换 / Sketch / Adobe XD / 纯前端 code handoff (HTML·CSS) / 印刷 CMYK 专业制版 (仅触及).) Master OS — automated mastery of Figma → Photoshop (PSD) 设计稿转换 (从业者视角) — 把 Figma 设计文件高保真转换为 Photoshop 分层 PSD, 核心是对齐两个工具的概念/渲染差异, 让产出的设计稿视觉一致. 覆盖: (a) 概念映射 — Figma frame / auto-layout / component / variant / constraint / vector-network / boolean / effect (drop·inner shadow / layer·background blur) / mask / blend mode / gradient / text-engine / color 与 Photoshop artboard / group / smart-object / linked / layer-style / shape-layer / path / clipping·layer mask / blend-mode 的对应关系与不可逆损耗点; (b) 转换方法栈 — 插件直出 PSD / 导出图层 (PNG·SVG) 再重组 / SVG·PDF 桥接 / 手工重建 / Figma REST API + Photoshop UXP·ExtendScript 脚本化, 各法在保真度-可编辑性-工时上的权衡与选型; (c) 保真度 QA — 字体回退与缺字处理 / 颜色空间 (sRGB·ICC profile) / 效果参数对齐 / @Nx·DPI 与栅格化 / 像素 diff 验收; (d) 两种交付目标 — 可编辑分层 PSD vs 像素保真扁平 PSD 的方法选择. 主战场 = Figma Community 插件 + Adobe 官方文档/论坛 + 设计交付 (design handoff) 实践 + 设计师社区. 不含: PSD→Figma 反向转换 / Sketch / Adobe XD / 纯前端 code handoff (HTML·CSS) / 印刷 CMYK 专业制版 (仅触及).: top builders' mental models, tool stack, current workflows, jargon, and where to keep up. Trigger this skill when the user works on Figma → Photoshop (PSD) 设计稿转换 (从业者视角) — 把 Figma 设计文件高保真转换为 Photoshop 分层 PSD, 核心是对齐两个工具的概念/渲染差异, 让产出的设计稿视觉一致. 覆盖: (a) 概念映射 — Figma frame / auto-layout / component / variant / constraint / vector-network / boolean / effect (drop·inner shadow / layer·background blur) / mask / blend mode / gradient / text-engine / color 与 Photoshop artboard / group / smart-object / linked / layer-style / shape-layer / path / clipping·layer mask / blend-mode 的对应关系与不可逆损耗点; (b) 转换方法栈 — 插件直出 PSD / 导出图层 (PNG·SVG) 再重组 / SVG·PDF 桥接 / 手工重建 / Figma REST API + Photoshop UXP·ExtendScript 脚本化, 各法在保真度-可编辑性-工时上的权衡与选型; (c) 保真度 QA — 字体回退与缺字处理 / 颜色空间 (sRGB·ICC profile) / 效果参数对齐 / @Nx·DPI 与栅格化 / 像素 diff 验收; (d) 两种交付目标 — 可编辑分层 PSD vs 像素保真扁平 PSD 的方法选择. 主战场 = Figma Community 插件 + Adobe 官方文档/论坛 + 设计交付 (design handoff) 实践 + 设计师社区. 不含: PSD→Figma 反向转换 / Sketch / Adobe XD / 纯前端 code handoff (HTML·CSS) / 印刷 CMYK 专业制版 (仅触及). problems and wants industry-grade thinking, tool selection, or workflow guidance. 触发词：「figma 转 psd」「figma to psd」「figma 转 photoshop」「figma 导出 psd」「设计稿转换」
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
QA test a live website with Firecrawl browser and scrape evidence. Use when the user wants exploratory QA, form testing, navigation/link checks, responsive checks, performance observations, bug reports, or a pre-launch quality review.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Runtime QA of a change: start the app, test acceptance criteria and edge cases, and report evidence. Use for "test this", "QA", "does it work", exploratory checks, or post-review runtime verification. Not static code review.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Run the critical path smoke test gate before QA hand-off. Executes the automated test suite, verifies core functionality, and produces a PASS/FAIL report. Run after a sprint's stories are implemented and before manual QA begins. A failed smoke check means the build is not ready for QA.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。