SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB qa-testing

Run QA testing on a page, feature, or full site at one of three depth tiers (smoke, standard, full). Use this skill whenever the user asks to QA a page or site, run a smoke test after a deploy, verify a page before launch, or run a regression sweep. Triggers on QA, QA sweep, smoke test, regression test, post-deploy check, pre-launch check, verify the deploy, test this page, does the page render, broken link, 404, image not loading. Also triggers proactively after a deploy or a new page launch where verification matters. Covers accessibility, performance, and SEO at the surface-signal level only: deep audits belong to `accessibility-audit`, `performance-optimization`, and `seo-technical`, and code-level debugging to `code-review-web`.

rampstackco/claude-skills Agent Skills author: rampstackco 3 files body ≈ 3 002 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 h ago

Run QA testing on a page, feature, or full site at one of three depth tiers (smoke, standard, full).

As a process B 78/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: running it twice, progress reporting

ProcedureInfrastructureSoftware developmentData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
89
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
78/100
Nearly there
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
Failures and branches w 10
50
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: qa-testing (rampstackco/claude-skills)

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "catalog_summary"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "display_order"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 78/100

    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 7 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 38 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3002 tokens
    • low 10 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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 743: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 19 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 38 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.