team-qa
Automated QA team orchestration for test planning and manual execution.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/team-qa && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/12339" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/team-qa && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/team-qa
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Orchestrate the QA team through a full testing cycle. Coordinates qa-lead (strategy + test plan) and qa-tester (test case writing + bug reporting) to produce a complete QA package for a sprint or feature. Covers: test plan generation, test case writing, smoke check gate, manual QA execution, and sign-off report.Key capabilities
- →Generate a QA strategy based on in-scope stories
- →Classify stories by type (Logic, Integration, Visual/Feel, UI, Config/Data)
- →Produce a structured test plan document
- →Coordinate qa-tester subagents for test case writing and bug reporting
- →Generate a QA sign-off report with a final verdict
How it works
The skill orchestrates QA subagents (qa-lead and qa-tester) through phases of strategy, test plan generation, test case writing, and reporting, with user approval at each phase transition.
Inputs & outputs
When to use team-qa
- →Execute full QA sprint cycle
- →Generate feature test plan
- →Manage bug reporting process
About this skill
When this skill is invoked, orchestrate the QA team through a structured testing cycle.
Decision Points: At each phase transition, use AskUserQuestion to present
the user with the subagent's proposals as selectable options. Write the agent's
full analysis in conversation, then capture the decision with concise labels.
The user must approve before moving to the next phase.
Phase 0: Resolve Review Mode
- If
--review [mode]was passed as an argument, use that mode. - Else read
production/review-mode.txt— use whatever is written there. - Else default to
lean.
Modes:
full— spawn all director and lead gates as describedlean— skip director gates unless they are PHASE-GATE type (CD-PHASE-GATE, TD-PHASE-GATE, PR-PHASE-GATE, AD-PHASE-GATE)solo— skip all director gate spawning entirely; run the skill without any agent gates
Store the resolved mode for use in all subsequent phases.
Team Composition
- qa-lead — QA strategy, test plan generation, story classification, sign-off report
- qa-tester — Test case writing, bug report writing, manual QA documentation
How to Delegate
Use the Task tool to spawn each team member as a subagent:
subagent_type: qa-lead— Strategy, planning, classification, sign-offsubagent_type: qa-tester— Test case writing and bug report writing
Always provide full context in each agent's prompt (story file paths, QA plan path, scope constraints). Launch independent qa-tester tasks in parallel where possible (e.g., multiple stories in Phase 5 can be scaffolded simultaneously).
Pipeline
Phase 1: Load Context
Before doing anything else, gather the full scope:
-
Detect the current sprint or feature scope from the argument:
- If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g.,
sprint-03): Globproduction/sprints/for files matching*[sprint-identifier]*.md. Read the matched file. If multiple match, use the most recently modified. - If argument is
feature: [system-name]: glob story files tagged for that system - If no argument: read
production/session-state/active.mdandproduction/sprint-status.yaml(if present) to infer the active sprint
- If argument is a sprint identifier (e.g.,
-
Read
production/stage.txtto confirm the current project phase. -
Count stories found and report to the user:
"QA cycle starting for [sprint/feature]. Found [N] stories. Current stage: [stage]. Ready to begin QA strategy?"
Phase 2: QA Strategy (qa-lead)
Spawn qa-lead via Task to review all in-scope stories and produce a QA strategy.
Prompt the qa-lead to:
-
Read each story file
-
Classify each story by type: Logic / Integration / Visual/Feel / UI / Config/Data
-
Identify which stories require automated test evidence vs. manual QA
-
Flag any stories with missing acceptance criteria or missing test evidence that would block QA
-
Estimate manual QA effort (number of test sessions needed)
-
Before assessing smoke status, check for an existing smoke check report: Glob
production/qa/smoke-*.mdand read the most recently modified file (if found). If a report exists, use its verdict and findings directly — do not re-interview the user. If no report exists, note: "No prior smoke check report found — run/smoke-check sprintbefore proceeding." and set smoke check status to UNKNOWN (treat as PASS WITH WARNINGS for the purpose of continuing). Produce a smoke check verdict: PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS [list] / FAIL [list of failures] / UNKNOWN (no report found) -
Produce a strategy summary table and smoke check result:
Story Type Automated Required Manual Required Blocker? Smoke Check: [PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS / FAIL / UNKNOWN] — [source:
production/qa/smoke-[date].mdor "no report found"] — [details if not PASS]
If the smoke check result is FAIL, the qa-lead must list the failures prominently. QA cannot proceed past the strategy phase with a failed smoke check.
Present the qa-lead's full strategy to the user, then use AskUserQuestion:
question: "QA Strategy Review"
options:
- "Looks good — proceed to test plan"
- "Adjust story types before proceeding"
- "Skip blocked stories and proceed with the rest"
- "Smoke check failed — fix issues and re-run /team-qa"
- "Cancel — resolve blockers first"
If smoke check FAIL: do not proceed to Phase 3. Surface the failures from the smoke check report and stop. The user must fix them, re-run /smoke-check sprint, and then re-run /team-qa.
If smoke check UNKNOWN: surface a warning — "No smoke check report found. Recommend running /smoke-check sprint before QA. Proceeding with caution."
If smoke check PASS WITH WARNINGS: note the warnings for the sign-off report and continue.
If blockers are present: list them explicitly. The user may choose to skip blocked stories or cancel the cycle.
Phase 3: Test Plan Generation
Using the strategy from Phase 2, produce a structured test plan document.
The test plan should cover:
- Scope: sprint/feature name, story count, dates
- Story Classification Table: from Phase 2 strategy
- Automated Test Requirements: which stories need test files, expected paths in
tests/ - Manual QA Scope: which stories need manual walkthrough and what to validate
- Out of Scope: what is explicitly not being tested this cycle and why
- Entry Criteria: what must be true before QA can begin. Always include: (1) Smoke check PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS report exists at
production/qa/smoke-*.md, (2) build is stable (no crashes on launch), (3) all Must Have stories have Status: in-progress or done inproduction/sprint-status.yaml. Add any sprint-specific criteria beyond these. - Exit Criteria: what constitutes a completed QA cycle (all stories PASS or FAIL with bugs filed)
Ask: "May I write the QA plan to production/qa/qa-plan-[sprint]-[date].md?"
Write only after receiving approval.
Phase 4: Test Case Writing (qa-tester)
Smoke check is performed as part of Phase 2 (QA Strategy). If the smoke check returned FAIL in Phase 2, the cycle was stopped there. This phase only runs when the Phase 2 smoke check was PASS, PASS WITH WARNINGS, or UNKNOWN.
For each story requiring manual QA (Visual/Feel, UI, Integration without automated tests):
Spawn qa-tester via Task for each story (run in parallel where possible), providing:
- The story file path
- The relevant section of the QA plan for that story
- The GDD acceptance criteria for the system being tested (if available)
- Instructions to write detailed test cases covering all acceptance criteria
Each test case set should include:
- Preconditions: game state required before testing begins
- Steps: numbered, unambiguous actions
- Expected Result: what should happen
- Actual Result: field left blank for the tester to fill in
- Pass/Fail: field left blank
Present the test cases to the user for review before execution. Group by story.
Use AskUserQuestion per story group (batched 3-4 at a time):
question: "Test cases ready for [Story Group]. Review before manual QA begins?"
options:
- "Approved — begin manual QA for these stories"
- "Revise test cases for [story name]"
- "Skip manual QA for [story name] — not ready"
Phase 5: Manual QA Execution
Walk through each story in the approved manual QA list.
Batch stories into groups of 3-4 and use AskUserQuestion for each:
question: "Manual QA — [Story Title]\n[brief description of what to test]"
options:
- "PASS — all acceptance criteria verified"
- "PASS WITH NOTES — minor issues found (describe after)"
- "FAIL — criteria not met (describe after)"
- "BLOCKED — cannot test yet (reason)"
After each FAIL result: use AskUserQuestion to collect the failure description, then spawn qa-tester via Task to write a formal bug report in production/qa/bugs/.
Bug report naming: BUG-[NNN]-[short-slug].md (increment NNN from existing bugs in the directory).
After collecting all results, summarize:
- Stories PASS: [count]
- Stories PASS WITH NOTES: [count]
- Stories FAIL: [count] — bugs filed: [IDs]
- Stories BLOCKED: [count]
Phase 6: QA Sign-Off Report
Spawn qa-lead via Task to produce the sign-off report using all results from Phases 4–6.
The sign-off report format:
## QA Sign-Off Report: [Sprint/Feature]
**Date**: [date]
### Test Coverage Summary
| Story | Type | Auto Test | Manual QA | Result |
|-------|------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| [title] | Logic | PASS | — | PASS |
| [title] | Visual | — | PASS | PASS |
### Bugs Found
| ID | Story | Severity | Status |
|----|-------|----------|--------|
| BUG-001 | [story] | S2 | Open |
### Verdict: APPROVED / APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS / NOT APPROVED
**Conditions** (if any): [list what must be fixed before the build advances]
### Next Step
[guidance based on verdict]
Verdict rules:
- APPROVED: All stories PASS or PASS WITH NOTES; no S1/S2 bugs open
- APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: S3/S4 bugs open, or PASS WITH NOTES issues documented; no S1/S2 bugs
- NOT APPROVED: Any S1/S2 bugs open; or stories FAIL without documented workaround
Next step guidance by verdict:
- APPROVED: "Build is ready for the next phase. Run
/gate-checkto validate advancement." - APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: "Resolve conditions before advancing. S3/S4 bugs may be deferred to polish."
- NOT APPROVED: "Resolve S1/S2 bugs and re-run
/team-qaor targeted manual QA before advancing."
Ask: "May I write this QA sign-off report to production/qa/qa-signoff-[sprint]-[date].md?"
Write only after receiving approval.
Error Recovery Protocol
If any spawned agent (via Task) returns BLOCKED, errors, or cannot complete:
- Surface immediately: Report "[AgentName]: BLOCKED — [reason]" to the user before continuing to dependent phases
- Assess dependencies: Check whether the blocked agent's out
Content truncated.
When not to use it
- →When a smoke check result is FAIL and issues are not fixed
- →When input files are missing for spawned agents
- →When conflicting instructions exist between ADR and story
Limitations
- →It cannot proceed past the strategy phase with a failed smoke check
- →It requires user approval at each phase transition
- →It does not implement ADRs if their status is Proposed
How it compares
This skill provides a structured, multi-agent orchestrated QA cycle with explicit user decision points and error recovery, unlike a manual or single-agent QA process.
Compared to similar skills
team-qa side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| team-qa (this skill) | 0 | 2mo | No flags | Advanced |
| linear-ci-integration | 1 | 25d | Caution | Intermediate |
| work-on-issue | 0 | 6mo | Review | Intermediate |
| regression | 0 | 2mo | Review | Advanced |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
You might also like
linear-ci-integration
jeremylongshore
Configure Linear CI/CD integration with GitHub Actions and testing. Use when setting up automated testing, configuring CI pipelines, or integrating Linear sync into your build process. Trigger with phrases like "linear CI", "linear GitHub Actions", "linear automated tests", "CI linear pipeline", "linear CI/CD".
work-on-issue
meta-pytorch
Start work on a GitHub issue. Extracts requirements, creates worktree, sets up TDD workflow.
regression
ThePalaceProject
Run a full release regression test — sets up workspace, runs automated tools, guides manual testing, generates report and Jira tickets. Use for release gates and QA cycles.
ticket-implementation-copilot
Newton-School
Execute DSDS roadmap tickets using dependency-aware, acceptance-criteria-first delivery. Use when selecting the next unblocked ticket, implementing code changes, validating behavior, and reporting completion against ticket AC.
jira-api-test-cases
DiasLuc
Create API test cases from a Jira user story and the project's Swagger or OpenAPI file. Use when the task is to read a Jira story, derive functional API test cases from its acceptance criteria, propose the list for approval, and then create the approved cases as Jira subtasks with a consistent templ
uat-signoff
HoangNguyen0403
Walk a business/UAT approver through a plain-language demo of a verified feature and capture business acceptance signoff.