CD qa
Autonomous multi-app QA sweep that drives template apps with Playwright MCP. Use only when the user explicitly runs /qa or asks for an end-to-end QA sweep. Do not load it for ordinary feature work, single-page checks, or one-off bug fixes.
Autonomous multi-app QA sweep that drives template apps with Playwright MCP.
As a process D 44/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: templates/calendar/.env, templates/mail/.env, templates/<app>/app/routes/
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/calendar/.env - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/mail/.env - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/<app>/app/routes/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/<app>/app/routes.ts - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/<app>/CLAUDE.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/<app>/actions/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/<app>/server/routes/api/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: templates/{{app_name}}/ - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "scope"
Process rating: all ten parameters 44/100
- 0Tools and files. 8 referenced file(s) missing: templates/calendar/.env, templates/mail/.env, templates/<app>/app/routes/
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 62 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2872 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 239: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 28 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 62 items
- +4Has examples (10 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.