qa
GitHub执行代码变更的端到端QA审查。通过范围界定、分发检查清单及领域审查代理,并行进行正确性与覆盖率分析,并运行确定性构建测试。最终修复阻塞问题,给出就绪状态及待验证项。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add levy-street/world-of-claudecraft --skill qa -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "qa",
"description": "Run the full end-of-contribution QA review over the current change (the qa-checklist gate plus a coverage fan-out and the domain reviewers it names).",
"user-invocable": true
}
You are running the project's end-of-contribution QA gate. Do this now, before the change is called done.
-
Scope the review from the diff:
git diff --name-onlyfor uncommitted work. For committed work, merge-base against the branch's own base, nevermain(work is based off the latest release branch andmaintrails it, so a merge-base againstmainsweeps the whole release into scope). Fallback chain: the upstream, else the newestorigin/release/*branch, elseorigin/main:base=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref '@{upstream}' 2>/dev/null) || base=$(git for-each-ref --sort=-creatordate --format='%(refname:short)' \ 'refs/remotes/origin/release/*' | head -1) git diff --name-only "$(git merge-base HEAD "${base:-origin/main}")"..HEADIf the user passed an argument (a feature name, phase, or file list), use it to focus the scope.
-
Dispatch the
qa-checklistagent over that scope. It is the read-only gate: it scales its own depth to the size of the change, checks every repo invariant in play, and ends with an adversarial "what is missing" pass. Let it run; do not duplicate its work inline. -
If the change is more than a trivial single-surface edit, also fan out a small coverage pass in parallel: one agent for correctness, one for test coverage, one for dead code, each prompted for COVERAGE (report every gap with confidence and severity), not filtering.
-
Dispatch the domain reviewer agents that
qa-checklistnames for the surfaces this diff touches (for exampleprivacy-security-review,migration-safety,database-performance-reviewerfor SQL, indexes, query call sites, pool or lock behavior, timeout policy, or stored-data growth,cross-platform-sync,architecture-reviewer, and on a release branchrelease-malware-audit). Spawn them fresh; never have the implementer review its own work. -
Run the deterministic floor yourself so the verdict rests on green checks, not only agent reasoning:
npm run ci:changed(Biome on the changed files),npx tsc --noEmit, andnpx vitest run tests/architecture.test.ts tests/localization_fixes.test.ts. Report any red. -
Adversarially confirm each consequential finding before acting on it (about half of raw findings do not survive a second look). Then fix every BLOCKING and SHOULD-FIX finding, in focused commits. Report what you fixed and what remains as VERIFY (needs a run or E2E) or NICE-TO-HAVE.
End with a one-line verdict: READY or NOT READY, and the list of any VERIFY items the maintainer
still has to run by hand (for example npm run perf:tour, npm run test:browser, or the mobile
E2E scripts). READY is advisory judgment; npm run gate is the deterministic pre-merge contract
(release tier on release/**), so if it has not run green this session, list it as the first
VERIFY item.
Version History
- 2edc3ac Current 2026-07-19 18:52


