AC qa-execution-observation
当测试新人不知道执行时应该关注什么、或者有经验的测试发现"执行完了但好像什么都没发现"时使用此技能。测试执行不是"按步骤操作看结果"——你需要同时关注功能表现、接口响应、日志报错、UI 渲染、数据一致性、性能指标六路信号。大多数的 Bug 是被"不小心看到"的而非被测出来的。每轮执行后输出观察记录，在 9 列设计用例上回填「实际结果」与「结论」完成执行闭环，标注异常信号与待跟进问题。⚠️ 本技能示例可能调用外部监控/截图工具，请在受控环境执行。 触发场景：执行观察、观察日志、测试执行、多轮观察、执行异常、观察报告、需要分析执行过程异常时。 Use when the user asks about: observing test execution across six signal channels — functional behavior, API responses, logs, UI rendering, data consistency, and performance.
当测试新人不知道执行时应该关注什么、或者有经验的测试发现"执行完了但好像什么都没发现"时使用此技能。测试执行不是"按步骤操作看结果"——你需要同时关注功能表现、接口响应、日志报错、UI 渲染、数据一致性、性能指标六路信号。大多数的 Bug 是被"不小心看到"的而非被测出来的。每轮执行后输出观察记录，在 9…
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Grep Glob Bash
Files scanned: 4. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 59/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 21 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 677 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 2 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 447: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 21 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 94.