The qa skill systematically tests a web app, finds bugs, and verifies fixes with a staged workflow. Use it for regression testing, ship-readiness checks, or a structured QA guide when you need evidence, severity ratings, and atomic fix-and-retest loops instead of a generic bug-hunt prompt.
This skill scores 84/100, which means it is a solid directory listing for users who want a guided QA workflow rather than a generic prompt. The repository gives enough trigger language, workflow structure, and report/template evidence for agents to understand when to use it and what output to produce, though users should note the lack of an install command and some placeholder markers in the body.
- Explicit triggers and voice aliases make it easy for agents to invoke correctly ("qa", "test this site", "run QA").
- Strong operational structure: three QA tiers, health scores, fix evidence, and ship-readiness reporting are spelled out in SKILL.md and the report template.
- Useful support materials exist: an issue taxonomy and a QA report template provide concrete execution and reporting guidance.
- The skill body contains placeholder markers (todo/wip/placeholder), which suggests some sections may be unfinished or templated.
- No install command is provided in SKILL.md, so setup/adoption may require extra repository context.
Overview of qa skill
What qa skill does
The qa skill is for systematic QA testing of a web app, then fixing what it finds and re-checking the result. It is best for people who want more than a generic “look for bugs” prompt: this skill is built to follow a staged QA workflow, produce evidence, and keep fixes atomic with verification.
Who should use it
Use the qa skill when you need regression testing, ship-readiness validation, or a structured bug-hunt on a real app. It fits developers, PMs, and AI operators who already know the feature should work and need confidence about what still breaks, what is cosmetic, and what blocks release.
Why it stands out
The main value is decision quality. The qa skill supports tiered testing depth, report-first or fix-first workflows, and a severity taxonomy that helps separate critical regressions from low-priority polish. That makes the qa guide more useful for release checks than a plain prompt, especially when you need evidence, not guesses.
How to Use qa skill
Install and trigger qa
Install with npx skills add garrytan/gstack --skill qa. Then trigger it with a direct task statement such as: “qa this checkout flow,” “test this site for regressions,” or “find bugs and fix the high-severity ones.” The skill is designed to activate on QA-like phrasing, so be explicit about whether you want report-only or fixes.
Give it the right input
The qa skill works best when you provide the app URL, what changed, the target browser or device if relevant, and the test depth you want. A weak input is “test the app.” A stronger input is: “Run Standard qa on the new profile settings flow at https://…, focus on save/cancel, validation, back navigation, and mobile layout, and only fix critical/high issues.” That gives the agent a clear scope and severity boundary.
Start with these files
For qa usage, read SKILL.md first, then check references/issue-taxonomy.md and templates/qa-report-template.md. SKILL.md explains the workflow and routing; the taxonomy tells you how findings are categorized; the report template shows the output shape you should expect. If you are adapting the qa skill to your own repo, these files are the fastest path to understanding the install behavior.
Practical workflow tips
Treat qa as a loop: run tests, classify issues, fix atomically, then re-verify. If you want regression testing, name the feature, the user path, and the recent change so the skill can prioritize likely breakpoints. If you want broader coverage, ask for Standard or Exhaustive; if you want speed, ask for Quick and state that cosmetic issues should be ignored. The biggest quality gain comes from narrowing scope before the first pass.
qa skill FAQ
Is qa only for bug finding?
No. The qa skill is for finding bugs, but also for validating whether a feature is ready to ship and for producing a structured report of what was tested. If you need a true qa guide for Regression Testing, this is more useful than an open-ended “review my app” prompt.
How is qa different from a normal prompt?
A normal prompt usually asks an agent to inspect a site once. The qa skill adds workflow discipline: severity tiers, report structure, fix-and-retest behavior, and clearer handling of what counts as a blocker. That reduces back-and-forth when the question is, “does this actually work?”
Will this work for beginners?
Yes, if you can describe the feature and the desired outcome. Beginners get the best results when they keep the request concrete: page, flow, device, and acceptable severity. If you cannot define the scope, the skill may still run, but the findings will be less actionable.
When should I not use qa?
Do not use qa when you only need copy editing, architecture review, or a general product critique. It is also a poor fit for tasks where there is no runnable UI or where you cannot verify behavior against an actual app. In those cases, a different prompt or skill will be more efficient.
How to Improve qa skill
Give stronger test boundaries
The qa skill improves when you tell it what changed and what matters most. Include the affected routes, the user role, the device class, and any known risk areas. For qa for Regression Testing, mention the exact workflow that used to pass so the agent can compare intended behavior against the current build.
Ask for the right tier
Use Quick when you only care about blockers, Standard for normal release validation, and Exhaustive when cosmetic and UX issues matter too. If you do not specify a tier, the qa skill may over- or under-scan relative to your actual release risk. Matching tier to intent saves time and makes the output easier to trust.
Provide evidence-friendly context
If the app depends on auth, seeded data, feature flags, or a staging environment, say so up front. The qa skill is strongest when it can reproduce issues cleanly and report them with precise steps. Also tell it what “done” means: no critical issues, no console errors, or only fixes on the current branch.
Iterate on the first pass
After the first report, ask the qa skill to re-test only the changed areas and summarize what improved. If findings are too broad, narrow the scope; if they are too shallow, ask for deeper exploration of a single path. The fastest way to better qa usage is to turn vague review requests into repeatable test instructions with explicit success criteria.