QA quality perspective
SkillDev toolsUse this skill when QA quality perspective is needed for requirements, strategy, review, test cases, or reports; triggers include QA质量视角、测试质量评估 and QA quality perspective.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the QA quality perspective skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by naodeng/awesome-qa-skills in skills/en/testing-workflows/qa-quality-perspective/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
When to use
Use this at a requirements, strategy, review, test-case, or reporting stage when QA must assess testability, risk-based coverage, defect exposure, and quality risk from available evidence.
Inputs
stage(required):requirements-analysis,test-strategy,test-strategy-review,code-review,test-case-writing,test-case-review,test-reporting, ortest-report-review.- The declared stage inputs and any available requirement, code, test, defect, environment, or execution evidence.
Workflow
- Validate
stage. If it is missing or unsupported, return Not applicable, list supported stages, and request a validstage; do not generate filler conclusions. - Load and follow only the one Prompt mapped to that
stage; never combine stage Prompts. - Apply that Prompt's input threshold. When materials are insufficient, state facts, gaps, and needed evidence rather than inventing tests, defects, or quality conclusions.
- Produce a standalone QA quality report that separates facts, evidence, inference, missing evidence, and recommendations.
stage | Only Prompt to load |
|---|---|
requirements-analysis | prompts/requirements-analysis.md |
test-strategy | prompts/test-strategy.md |
test-strategy-review | prompts/test-strategy-review.md |
code-review | prompts/code-review.md |
test-case-writing | prompts/test-case-writing.md |
test-case-review | prompts/test-case-review.md |
test-reporting | prompts/test-reporting.md |
test-report-review | prompts/test-report-review.md |
QA responsibilities and boundary
- Focus on testability, risk-based coverage, observability, test evidence, defect risk, untested scope, and quality risk.
- Treat only supplied material as fact; label inference and missing evidence. Never invent product intent, acceptance rules, implementation behavior, execution records, defects, or metrics.
- QA does not decide product intent, certify code correctness, or approve release. Without execution evidence, it must never infer that testing ran, passed, or verified quality.
Report contract
Unless returning Not applicable, include: Summary, Facts, Evidence, Inference, Testability, Risk-based coverage, Defects and quality risks, Missing evidence, Recommendations and next steps, Confidence. Tie every quality conclusion to evidence; classify risk as high, medium, or low with impact and uncertainty.
Pre-delivery check
- The
stageis valid and exactly one matching Prompt was loaded - Facts, evidence, inference, missing evidence, and recommendations are distinct
- Testability and risk-based coverage are assessed, or the reason they cannot be assessed is explicit
- No missing product intent, implementation fact, or execution result is reported as fact
- Without execution evidence, the report does not imply or claim executed, passed, or verified testing
On-demand loading and pitfalls
- Read only the mapped
prompts/file afterstageis valid. Readevals/for regression work, but never treat eval cases as project facts. - Do not replace evidence with a generic risk checklist, or present test recommendations, static reading, or stakeholder opinion as a passing execution result.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 210
- Forks
- 29
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
qa-quality-perspective- Source
- github.com/naodeng/awesome-qa-skills