本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

qa-metrics

Build QA quality dashboards, calculate defect metrics, analyze escape rates, and produce quality trend reports. Use this skill whenever a QA lead or manager needs to measure and communicate quality outcomes. Trigger on phrases like "quality metrics", "defect density", "escape rate", "bug trends", "quality dashboard", "sprint quality report", "test coverage metrics", "QA KPIs", "how is quality trending", "defect leakage", "production bugs this quarter", "mean time to detect", "quality scorecard", or any request to quantify, visualize, or report on the quality of a product or testing process. Also trigger when a manager asks "how is QA performing?" or an engineering lead asks "what does our defect data tell us?".

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md9.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Overview

Based on "Accelerate" by Nicole Forsgren, Jez Humble & Gene Kim. The DORA research (DevOps Research and Assessment) identified four metrics that predict both software delivery performance and organizational outcomes. High-performing teams excel on all four. QA directly influences two of them - change failure rate and mean time to restore - and enables the other two through fast, reliable test automation.

QA Metrics

Measure, analyze, and communicate quality outcomes through data.

When to Use

  • Building a quality dashboard for a sprint review or exec report
  • Calculating defect density or escape rate for a release
  • Analyzing defect trends over time to surface systemic issues
  • Producing a weekly or monthly QA health report
  • Demonstrating the value of QA investment to leadership

Core Metrics

DORA Metrics (Accelerate Framework)

The four metrics that differentiate elite from low-performing engineering teams:

MetricWhat it measuresElite benchmarkQA influence
Deployment FrequencyHow often code ships to productionOn-demand (multiple/day)Fast, reliable automation enables frequent deploys
Lead Time for ChangesCommit to production time< 1 hourSlow QA cycles lengthen lead time
Change Failure Rate% of releases causing production incidents0-15%Test coverage directly reduces this
Mean Time to Restore (MTTR)Time to recover from production failure< 1 hourGood observability + runbooks reduce this

QA's accountability: Own change failure rate and contribute to lead time. If change failure rate is above 15%, testing strategy needs a root cause review. If QA is a bottleneck in lead time, automate or parallelize.

Defect Metrics

Defect Density Number of defects per unit of functionality.

  • Formula: Total defects / feature area (story points, function points, or KLOC)
  • Use: compare quality across sprints or modules
  • Target: trending down over time in stable areas

Defect Escape Rate (Leakage) Percentage of defects found by customers (production) vs QA (pre-release).

  • Formula: (Production defects / Total defects) × 100
  • Use: measures QA effectiveness at catching defects before they ship
  • Target: < 10% escape rate is strong. > 20% signals a coverage problem.

Defect Detection Efficiency (DDE) How early defects are caught in the development lifecycle.

  • Formula: (Defects found pre-release / Total defects including production) × 100
  • Use: rewards early-stage testing; earlier detection = cheaper fix
  • Target: > 90%

Defect Aging Average time from defect open to resolution.

  • Formula: Sum of (close date - open date) / number of defects closed
  • Use: identifies bottlenecks in the fix cycle
  • Watch for: P1/P2 defects staying open > 48 hours

Test Execution Metrics

Test Pass Rate Percentage of test cases that passed in a given cycle.

  • Formula: (Passed cases / Total executed) × 100
  • Caveat: pass rate is only meaningful if test cases are well-designed. High pass rate + high escape rate = weak test suite.

Test Coverage Percentage of requirements or features covered by test cases.

  • Formula: (Features with test cases / Total features) × 100
  • Track separately: unit, integration, E2E coverage

Automation Coverage Percentage of regression cases automated.

  • Formula: (Automated cases / Total regression cases) × 100
  • Target: 70%+ automation in stable product areas

Test Execution Velocity Test cases executed per day or per sprint.

  • Use: capacity planning, identifying execution bottlenecks

Release Quality Metrics

Production Defect Rate Defects per release found in production within 30 days of ship.

  • Use: lagging indicator of release quality
  • Track by severity: P1/P2 in production is a critical signal

Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) Average time between a defect being introduced and being found.

  • Shorter MTTD = earlier detection = cheaper fix

Regression Rate Percentage of releases where a previously passing feature breaks.

  • Formula: (Releases with regressions / Total releases) × 100
  • Use: measures stability of the regression suite

Workflow

Step 1: Identify What to Measure

Not every metric is useful for every context. Match metrics to questions:

QuestionMetrics to Use
Is quality improving over time?Defect density trend, escape rate trend
Is QA catching bugs early enough?DDE, MTTD, defect by phase
Are we shipping stable releases?Regression rate, production defect rate
Is automation keeping up?Automation coverage, execution velocity
Where are the quality hotspots?Defect density by module/team

Step 2: Collect Data

Define your data sources:

  • Defect tracker (Jira, Linear, GitHub Issues): open/closed defects, severity, discovery phase, resolution time
  • Test management (TestRail, Zephyr, spreadsheet): executed cases, pass/fail, coverage
  • CI/CD pipeline: test run results, flaky test rate, build failure rate
  • Production monitoring (Datadog, PagerDuty): production incidents, customer-reported bugs

Step 3: Calculate and Visualize

For a sprint report, calculate at minimum:

  • Defects opened vs closed (net trend)
  • Escape rate for the sprint
  • Regression pass rate
  • Any P1/P2 defects in production

For a quarterly report, add:

  • Defect density by module (hotspot map)
  • Escape rate trend (12-week rolling)
  • Automation coverage change
  • DDE trend

Step 4: Write the Quality Report

Sprint Quality Report template:

Sprint [n] Quality Report - [dates]
Team: [team name]
QA Lead: [name]

Test Execution:
  Cases executed: [n]
  Pass rate: [x]%
  Automation coverage: [x]%

Defects:
  Opened: [n] (P1: [n] | P2: [n] | P3: [n])
  Closed: [n]
  Escaped to production: [n]
  Escape rate: [x]%

Release Quality:
  Production defects (this release): [n]
  Regression rate: PASS / FAIL
  Sign-off: GO / NO-GO

Hotspots:
  [area with disproportionate defects and why]

Trend:
  [1-2 sentences: is quality improving, stable, or degrading?]

Actions:
  [specific action, owner, due date]

Quarterly Quality Dashboard sections:

  1. Headline scorecard (4-5 KPIs with trend arrows)
  2. Defect trend chart (12-week rolling, by severity)
  3. Escape rate chart (by release)
  4. Automation coverage progress
  5. Module hotspot map (defect density by area)
  6. Key wins and risks
  7. Actions for next quarter

Step 5: Drive Action

Metrics without action are reporting theater. For every negative trend:

  • State the root cause hypothesis
  • Propose one specific action
  • Assign an owner and a deadline
  • Track it to resolution in the next report

Anti-Patterns

Vanity metrics "We ran 500 test cases" is not a quality metric. It is a volume metric. Pass rate, escape rate, and defect density are quality metrics. Distinguish between activity (what QA did) and outcomes (what quality resulted).

Reporting in isolation A 95% pass rate means nothing without context. Is that up or down from last sprint? Is the test suite getting weaker or stronger? Always show trend, not just point-in-time.

No action items A quality report with no action items is a postcard. If metrics show a problem, someone must own fixing it. If metrics show everything is fine, note what is working and why.

Measuring only pre-release defects Escape rate requires production data. QA teams that only track what they found - not what customers found - are grading their own homework. Include production defect rate in every quarterly review.

Automation coverage without flaky test tracking An automation suite that is 80% automated but 30% flaky is worse than 60% automated with stable tests. Track flaky test rate alongside automation coverage. Flaky tests erode confidence faster than low coverage.

Quality Checklist

Before publishing any quality report:

  • Metrics are calculated from actual data, not estimates
  • Escape rate includes production defects (not just pre-release)
  • Trend context provided (not just point-in-time numbers)
  • Every negative metric has a root cause hypothesis
  • Every action item has an owner and a due date
  • Automation coverage and flaky test rate reported together
  • Report is versioned and stored where stakeholders can access it
  • P1/P2 production defects called out by name, not buried in totals

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

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-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する