@fernando.zavaleta/ai-platform-core 0.0.7-beta
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
- package/02-mcp/02.1-jira/bridge-protocol.md +50 -0
- package/02-mcp/02.2-testrail/bridge.md +0 -0
- package/02-mcp/02.4-sdp/bridge-protocol.md +15 -0
- package/02-mcp/03.3-confluence/bridge-protocol.md +16 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/agent.md +68 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/knowledge/risk-analysis.md +163 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/profile.json +10 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/analyze-ticket-risk.md +252 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/generate-regression-suite.md +11 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/generate-smoke-suite.md +11 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/generate-test-cases.md +41 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/generate-test-plan.md +25 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/generate-test-scenarios.md +23 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/normalize-ticket.md +83 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/skills/report-bug.md +41 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/templates/bug-report-template.md +62 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/templates/test-case-template.md +29 -0
- package/03-domains/03.1-qa/templates/test-plan-template.md +86 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/agent.md +80 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/skills/analyze-incident-rca.md +16 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/skills/correlate-rca.md +16 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/skills/generate-diagnosis.md +17 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/skills/normalize-incident.md +15 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/skills/search-rca-confluence.md +13 -0
- package/03-domains/03.3-l3/templates/rca-template.md +21 -0
- package/03-domains/03.4-product/agent.md +80 -0
- package/03-domains/03.4-product/knowledge/story-quality.md +16 -0
- package/03-domains/03.4-product/skills/validate-story.md +152 -0
- package/03-domains/03.4-product/templates/story-quality-template.md +67 -0
- package/README.md +52 -0
- package/bin/cli.js +45 -0
- package/bin/ia_install.py +38 -0
- package/package.json +18 -0
|
@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Jira Bridge Protocol
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
## Objective
|
|
4
|
+
Retrieve Jira issue data from Belcorp Jira Data Center.
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
## Credentials Source
|
|
7
|
+
Credentials are stored in:
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
00-config/credentials.json
|
|
10
|
+
|
|
11
|
+
Expected format:
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
{
|
|
14
|
+
"jira": {
|
|
15
|
+
"base_url": "https://jiracorp.belcorp.biz",
|
|
16
|
+
"pat_token": "TOKEN_PERSONAL_JIRA"
|
|
17
|
+
}
|
|
18
|
+
}
|
|
19
|
+
|
|
20
|
+
## Execution Steps
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
1. Read credentials from credentials.json
|
|
23
|
+
2. Extract base_url
|
|
24
|
+
3. Extract pat_token
|
|
25
|
+
4. Execute the curl command
|
|
26
|
+
5. Store the JSON response in the context for further processing
|
|
27
|
+
|
|
28
|
+
## Command
|
|
29
|
+
|
|
30
|
+
curl -s \
|
|
31
|
+
-H "Authorization: Bearer $(jq -r '.jira.pat_token' 00-config/credentials.json)" \
|
|
32
|
+
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
|
|
33
|
+
$(jq -r '.jira.base_url' 00-config/credentials.json)/rest/api/2/issue/[ISSUE_ID]
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
## Expected JSON Fields
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
The response must contain:
|
|
38
|
+
|
|
39
|
+
- key
|
|
40
|
+
- fields.summary
|
|
41
|
+
- fields.description
|
|
42
|
+
- fields.status.name
|
|
43
|
+
- fields.assignee.displayName
|
|
44
|
+
- fields.components
|
|
45
|
+
- fields.labels
|
|
46
|
+
- fields.comment.comments
|
|
47
|
+
|
|
48
|
+
## Post Processing
|
|
49
|
+
The retrieved JSON must be saved in the directory of the active agent:
|
|
50
|
+
05-output/[ACTIVE_AGENT_FOLDER]/[ISSUE_ID]/ticket.json
|
|
File without changes
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# SDP Bridge Protocol
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
## Objective
|
|
4
|
+
Retrieve incident data from ServiceDesk Plus (SDP) when a ticket is not found in Jira.
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
## Execution Steps
|
|
7
|
+
1. Read `technician_key` and `base_url` from `00-config/credentials.json`.
|
|
8
|
+
2. Execute curl request to fetch request details.
|
|
9
|
+
3. Map SDP fields to a standard JSON format.
|
|
10
|
+
|
|
11
|
+
## Command
|
|
12
|
+
```bash
|
|
13
|
+
curl -X GET "$(jq -r '.sdp.base_url' 00-config/credentials.json)/requests/[TICKET_ID]" \
|
|
14
|
+
-H "authtoken: $(jq -r '.sdp.technician_key' 00-config/credentials.json)" \
|
|
15
|
+
-H "Accept: application/vnd.manageengine.sdp.v3+json"
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Confluence Bridge Protocol (RCA Search)
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
## Objective
|
|
4
|
+
Retrieve relevant RCAs from Confluence using semantic search to avoid token overflow.
|
|
5
|
+
|
|
6
|
+
## Execution Steps
|
|
7
|
+
1. Read credentials (PAT Token) from 00-config/credentials.json.
|
|
8
|
+
2. Search index (Vector DB) using the incident summary as query.
|
|
9
|
+
3. If no match in index, fetch latest RCAs from:
|
|
10
|
+
https://confluence.belcorp.biz/display/RSB/SBR+RCAs
|
|
11
|
+
4. Return top 3 matches to the Agent.
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
## Tool Command (Pseudo-bash)
|
|
14
|
+
# Se prefiere bash/curl según global-base.md
|
|
15
|
+
curl -s -u $(jq -r '.confluence.user' 00-config/credentials.json):$(jq -r '.confluence.token' 00-config/credentials.json) \
|
|
16
|
+
"https://confluence.belcorp.biz/rest/api/content/search?cql=ancestor=PAGE_ID_RCAS AND text ~ '[QUERY]'"
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# QA AI Agent Persona
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are a Senior QA Engineer AI Agent.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Your mission is to autonomously produce complete QA artifacts from Jira tickets.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
All outputs must be in SPANISH.
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
---
|
|
10
|
+
|
|
11
|
+
# QA Workflow Pipeline
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
Step 1
|
|
14
|
+
Fetch Ticket
|
|
15
|
+
Use: 02-mcp/02.1-jira/bridge.md
|
|
16
|
+
Store output as: 05-output/agente-qa/[JIRA_ID]/ticket.json
|
|
17
|
+
|
|
18
|
+
---
|
|
19
|
+
|
|
20
|
+
Step 2
|
|
21
|
+
Normalize Ticket
|
|
22
|
+
Use skill: skills/normalize-ticket.md
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
24
|
+
---
|
|
25
|
+
|
|
26
|
+
Step 3
|
|
27
|
+
Risk Analysis
|
|
28
|
+
Use skill: skills/analyze-ticket-risk.md
|
|
29
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].analyze-risk.md
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
---
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
Step 4
|
|
34
|
+
Test Plan
|
|
35
|
+
Use skill: skills/generate-test-plan.md
|
|
36
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].test-plan.md
|
|
37
|
+
|
|
38
|
+
---
|
|
39
|
+
|
|
40
|
+
Step 5
|
|
41
|
+
Test Scenarios
|
|
42
|
+
Use skill: skills/generate-test-scenarios.md
|
|
43
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].test-scenarios.md
|
|
44
|
+
|
|
45
|
+
---
|
|
46
|
+
|
|
47
|
+
Step 6
|
|
48
|
+
Test Cases
|
|
49
|
+
Use skill: skills/generate-test-cases.md
|
|
50
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].test-cases.md
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
---
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
Step 7
|
|
55
|
+
Smoke Suite
|
|
56
|
+
Use skill: skills/generate-smoke-suite.md
|
|
57
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].smoke-suite.md
|
|
58
|
+
|
|
59
|
+
---
|
|
60
|
+
|
|
61
|
+
Step 8
|
|
62
|
+
Regression Suite
|
|
63
|
+
Use skill: skills/generate-regression-suite.md
|
|
64
|
+
Output: [JIRA_ID].regression-suite.md
|
|
65
|
+
|
|
66
|
+
---
|
|
67
|
+
|
|
68
|
+
All files must be stored in: 05-output/agente-qa/[JIRA_ID]/
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Risk Analysis in Software Testing
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
## Purpose
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Risk analysis helps prioritize testing efforts by identifying areas of the system that are most likely to fail or cause business impact.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
The QA Agent uses risk analysis to determine:
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
- Testing depth
|
|
10
|
+
- Test coverage requirements
|
|
11
|
+
- Regression testing scope
|
|
12
|
+
- Test execution priority
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
---
|
|
15
|
+
|
|
16
|
+
# Risk Definition
|
|
17
|
+
|
|
18
|
+
Risk is determined by two factors:
|
|
19
|
+
|
|
20
|
+
Risk = Probability of Failure × Impact of Failure
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
Where:
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
24
|
+
Probability = likelihood that the defect will occur
|
|
25
|
+
Impact = severity of consequences if the defect occurs
|
|
26
|
+
|
|
27
|
+
---
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
# Types of Risk
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
## Business Risk
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
Business risk measures the impact of a failure on the organization or its users.
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
Examples:
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
- Payment processing failures
|
|
38
|
+
- Login failures
|
|
39
|
+
- Data loss
|
|
40
|
+
- Customer account issues
|
|
41
|
+
|
|
42
|
+
Testing focus:
|
|
43
|
+
|
|
44
|
+
High business risk features require extensive testing.
|
|
45
|
+
|
|
46
|
+
---
|
|
47
|
+
|
|
48
|
+
## Technical Risk
|
|
49
|
+
|
|
50
|
+
Technical risk measures the complexity or fragility of the system.
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
Examples:
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
- Complex algorithms
|
|
55
|
+
- Multi-service architecture
|
|
56
|
+
- Asynchronous processing
|
|
57
|
+
- New or experimental technologies
|
|
58
|
+
|
|
59
|
+
Testing focus:
|
|
60
|
+
|
|
61
|
+
High technical risk requires deep test coverage.
|
|
62
|
+
|
|
63
|
+
---
|
|
64
|
+
|
|
65
|
+
## Integration Risk
|
|
66
|
+
|
|
67
|
+
Integration risk arises when multiple systems interact.
|
|
68
|
+
|
|
69
|
+
Examples:
|
|
70
|
+
|
|
71
|
+
- Third-party APIs
|
|
72
|
+
- Payment providers
|
|
73
|
+
- External authentication systems
|
|
74
|
+
|
|
75
|
+
Testing focus:
|
|
76
|
+
|
|
77
|
+
Integration testing and error handling scenarios.
|
|
78
|
+
|
|
79
|
+
---
|
|
80
|
+
|
|
81
|
+
## Change Risk
|
|
82
|
+
|
|
83
|
+
Change risk occurs when modifying existing functionality.
|
|
84
|
+
|
|
85
|
+
Examples:
|
|
86
|
+
|
|
87
|
+
- Updating shared libraries
|
|
88
|
+
- Modifying core services
|
|
89
|
+
- Changing business logic
|
|
90
|
+
|
|
91
|
+
Testing focus:
|
|
92
|
+
|
|
93
|
+
Regression testing is essential.
|
|
94
|
+
|
|
95
|
+
---
|
|
96
|
+
|
|
97
|
+
# Risk Levels
|
|
98
|
+
|
|
99
|
+
## Low Risk
|
|
100
|
+
|
|
101
|
+
Characteristics:
|
|
102
|
+
|
|
103
|
+
- Small UI changes
|
|
104
|
+
- Minor configuration updates
|
|
105
|
+
- Isolated functionality
|
|
106
|
+
|
|
107
|
+
Testing approach:
|
|
108
|
+
|
|
109
|
+
Basic functional validation.
|
|
110
|
+
|
|
111
|
+
---
|
|
112
|
+
|
|
113
|
+
## Medium Risk
|
|
114
|
+
|
|
115
|
+
Characteristics:
|
|
116
|
+
|
|
117
|
+
- Moderate functionality changes
|
|
118
|
+
- Minor backend logic updates
|
|
119
|
+
|
|
120
|
+
Testing approach:
|
|
121
|
+
|
|
122
|
+
Functional testing plus negative scenarios.
|
|
123
|
+
|
|
124
|
+
---
|
|
125
|
+
|
|
126
|
+
## High Risk
|
|
127
|
+
|
|
128
|
+
Characteristics:
|
|
129
|
+
|
|
130
|
+
- Core system functionality
|
|
131
|
+
- Shared components
|
|
132
|
+
- Complex workflows
|
|
133
|
+
|
|
134
|
+
Testing approach:
|
|
135
|
+
|
|
136
|
+
Extensive testing and regression coverage.
|
|
137
|
+
|
|
138
|
+
---
|
|
139
|
+
|
|
140
|
+
## Critical Risk
|
|
141
|
+
|
|
142
|
+
Characteristics:
|
|
143
|
+
|
|
144
|
+
- Financial operations
|
|
145
|
+
- Authentication systems
|
|
146
|
+
- Data security
|
|
147
|
+
|
|
148
|
+
Testing approach:
|
|
149
|
+
|
|
150
|
+
Full test coverage including regression and integration validation.
|
|
151
|
+
|
|
152
|
+
---
|
|
153
|
+
|
|
154
|
+
# Risk-Based Testing
|
|
155
|
+
|
|
156
|
+
Risk-based testing ensures that testing resources focus on the most critical parts of the system.
|
|
157
|
+
|
|
158
|
+
The QA Agent must prioritize testing based on:
|
|
159
|
+
|
|
160
|
+
- business criticality
|
|
161
|
+
- technical complexity
|
|
162
|
+
- system dependencies
|
|
163
|
+
- regression risk
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,252 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Skill: Analyze Ticket Risk
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
## Objective
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Evaluate the business and technical risk associated with a Jira ticket in order to determine the appropriate QA testing scope.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
This analysis determines:
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
- Testing depth
|
|
10
|
+
- Required test coverage
|
|
11
|
+
- Regression scope
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
All outputs must be generated in SPANISH.
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
---
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
# Input
|
|
18
|
+
|
|
19
|
+
Primary source:
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
05-output/agente-qa/[JIRA_ID]/ticket.json
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
The JSON contains:
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
Summary
|
|
26
|
+
Description
|
|
27
|
+
Components
|
|
28
|
+
Labels
|
|
29
|
+
Assignee
|
|
30
|
+
Comments
|
|
31
|
+
Linked issues
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
---
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
# Knowledge Source
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
Risk evaluation must apply principles from:
|
|
38
|
+
|
|
39
|
+
03-domains/03.1-qa/knowledge/risk-analysis.md
|
|
40
|
+
|
|
41
|
+
The AI must use this knowledge base to guide reasoning.
|
|
42
|
+
|
|
43
|
+
---
|
|
44
|
+
|
|
45
|
+
# Risk Evaluation Dimensions
|
|
46
|
+
|
|
47
|
+
The AI must evaluate risk across the following dimensions.
|
|
48
|
+
|
|
49
|
+
## 1 Business Impact
|
|
50
|
+
|
|
51
|
+
Evaluate how critical the functionality is for the business.
|
|
52
|
+
|
|
53
|
+
Questions:
|
|
54
|
+
|
|
55
|
+
Does this feature impact revenue?
|
|
56
|
+
Does it affect core workflows?
|
|
57
|
+
Does it affect many users?
|
|
58
|
+
|
|
59
|
+
Score:
|
|
60
|
+
|
|
61
|
+
LOW
|
|
62
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
63
|
+
HIGH
|
|
64
|
+
|
|
65
|
+
---
|
|
66
|
+
|
|
67
|
+
## 2 Technical Complexity
|
|
68
|
+
|
|
69
|
+
Evaluate the technical implementation complexity.
|
|
70
|
+
|
|
71
|
+
Indicators:
|
|
72
|
+
|
|
73
|
+
Multiple services involved
|
|
74
|
+
Database changes
|
|
75
|
+
API integrations
|
|
76
|
+
Authentication changes
|
|
77
|
+
|
|
78
|
+
Score:
|
|
79
|
+
|
|
80
|
+
LOW
|
|
81
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
82
|
+
HIGH
|
|
83
|
+
|
|
84
|
+
---
|
|
85
|
+
|
|
86
|
+
## 3 System Impact
|
|
87
|
+
|
|
88
|
+
Evaluate how many system components may be affected.
|
|
89
|
+
|
|
90
|
+
Indicators:
|
|
91
|
+
|
|
92
|
+
Core modules modified
|
|
93
|
+
Shared components changed
|
|
94
|
+
Integration points impacted
|
|
95
|
+
|
|
96
|
+
Score:
|
|
97
|
+
|
|
98
|
+
LOW
|
|
99
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
100
|
+
HIGH
|
|
101
|
+
|
|
102
|
+
---
|
|
103
|
+
|
|
104
|
+
## 4 Change Scope
|
|
105
|
+
|
|
106
|
+
Evaluate the size of the change.
|
|
107
|
+
|
|
108
|
+
Indicators:
|
|
109
|
+
|
|
110
|
+
Large code changes
|
|
111
|
+
Multiple repositories
|
|
112
|
+
Configuration changes
|
|
113
|
+
|
|
114
|
+
Score:
|
|
115
|
+
|
|
116
|
+
LOW
|
|
117
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
118
|
+
HIGH
|
|
119
|
+
|
|
120
|
+
---
|
|
121
|
+
|
|
122
|
+
## 5 Historical Defect Risk
|
|
123
|
+
|
|
124
|
+
Evaluate historical instability.
|
|
125
|
+
|
|
126
|
+
Indicators:
|
|
127
|
+
|
|
128
|
+
Components with frequent defects
|
|
129
|
+
Areas with previous regressions
|
|
130
|
+
|
|
131
|
+
Score:
|
|
132
|
+
|
|
133
|
+
LOW
|
|
134
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
135
|
+
HIGH
|
|
136
|
+
|
|
137
|
+
---
|
|
138
|
+
|
|
139
|
+
# Risk Calculation
|
|
140
|
+
|
|
141
|
+
Determine the overall risk level using the following logic.
|
|
142
|
+
|
|
143
|
+
If multiple dimensions are HIGH → Overall Risk = HIGH
|
|
144
|
+
|
|
145
|
+
If most dimensions are MEDIUM → Overall Risk = MEDIUM
|
|
146
|
+
|
|
147
|
+
If most dimensions are LOW → Overall Risk = LOW
|
|
148
|
+
|
|
149
|
+
---
|
|
150
|
+
|
|
151
|
+
# Output
|
|
152
|
+
|
|
153
|
+
Create file:
|
|
154
|
+
|
|
155
|
+
05-output/agente-qa/[JIRA_ID]/[JIRA_ID].analyze-risk.md
|
|
156
|
+
|
|
157
|
+
---
|
|
158
|
+
|
|
159
|
+
# Output Structure
|
|
160
|
+
|
|
161
|
+
The document must follow this structure:
|
|
162
|
+
|
|
163
|
+
# Análisis de Riesgo del Ticket
|
|
164
|
+
|
|
165
|
+
## Ticket
|
|
166
|
+
[JIRA_ID]
|
|
167
|
+
|
|
168
|
+
## Resumen
|
|
169
|
+
Breve explicación del cambio solicitado.
|
|
170
|
+
|
|
171
|
+
---
|
|
172
|
+
|
|
173
|
+
## Evaluación de Riesgo
|
|
174
|
+
|
|
175
|
+
### Impacto de Negocio
|
|
176
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
177
|
+
|
|
178
|
+
Explicación.
|
|
179
|
+
|
|
180
|
+
---
|
|
181
|
+
|
|
182
|
+
### Complejidad Técnica
|
|
183
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
184
|
+
|
|
185
|
+
Explicación.
|
|
186
|
+
|
|
187
|
+
---
|
|
188
|
+
|
|
189
|
+
### Impacto en el Sistema
|
|
190
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
191
|
+
|
|
192
|
+
Explicación.
|
|
193
|
+
|
|
194
|
+
---
|
|
195
|
+
|
|
196
|
+
### Alcance del Cambio
|
|
197
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
198
|
+
|
|
199
|
+
Explicación.
|
|
200
|
+
|
|
201
|
+
---
|
|
202
|
+
|
|
203
|
+
### Riesgo Histórico
|
|
204
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
205
|
+
|
|
206
|
+
Explicación.
|
|
207
|
+
|
|
208
|
+
---
|
|
209
|
+
|
|
210
|
+
## Riesgo Global
|
|
211
|
+
|
|
212
|
+
LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH
|
|
213
|
+
|
|
214
|
+
Explicación de la decisión.
|
|
215
|
+
|
|
216
|
+
---
|
|
217
|
+
|
|
218
|
+
## Estrategia de Pruebas Recomendada
|
|
219
|
+
|
|
220
|
+
LOW
|
|
221
|
+
|
|
222
|
+
Smoke + targeted testing.
|
|
223
|
+
|
|
224
|
+
MEDIUM
|
|
225
|
+
|
|
226
|
+
Functional testing + partial regression.
|
|
227
|
+
|
|
228
|
+
HIGH
|
|
229
|
+
|
|
230
|
+
Full regression testing.
|
|
231
|
+
|
|
232
|
+
---
|
|
233
|
+
|
|
234
|
+
# Decision Rule
|
|
235
|
+
|
|
236
|
+
If Overall Risk = HIGH
|
|
237
|
+
|
|
238
|
+
Force:
|
|
239
|
+
|
|
240
|
+
Full Regression Suite
|
|
241
|
+
|
|
242
|
+
If Overall Risk = MEDIUM
|
|
243
|
+
|
|
244
|
+
Require:
|
|
245
|
+
|
|
246
|
+
Functional coverage + targeted regression
|
|
247
|
+
|
|
248
|
+
If Overall Risk = LOW
|
|
249
|
+
|
|
250
|
+
Allow:
|
|
251
|
+
|
|
252
|
+
Smoke + focused tests
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Test Case Generator
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are a Senior QA Engineer.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Your task is to create test cases based on the Jira ticket.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
## Input
|
|
8
|
+
User Story
|
|
9
|
+
Acceptance Criteria
|
|
10
|
+
Business Rules
|
|
11
|
+
|
|
12
|
+
## Instructions
|
|
13
|
+
|
|
14
|
+
1. Identify user flows.
|
|
15
|
+
2. Generate positive scenarios.
|
|
16
|
+
3. Generate negative scenarios.
|
|
17
|
+
4. Generate edge cases.
|
|
18
|
+
5. Generate UI validations.
|
|
19
|
+
6. Generate analytics validations if applicable.
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
## Test Case Rules
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
Each test case must include:
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
- Title
|
|
26
|
+
- Preconditions
|
|
27
|
+
- Steps
|
|
28
|
+
- Expected Result
|
|
29
|
+
- Test Data
|
|
30
|
+
- Priority
|
|
31
|
+
- Type
|
|
32
|
+
|
|
33
|
+
Steps must be structured in a table:
|
|
34
|
+
|
|
35
|
+
| Step | Expected Result |
|
|
36
|
+
|
|
37
|
+
## Output
|
|
38
|
+
|
|
39
|
+
Generate test cases following:
|
|
40
|
+
|
|
41
|
+
templates/test-case-template.md
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Test Plan Generator
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are a Senior QA Engineer.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Your task is to generate a Test Plan using the provided template.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
## Input
|
|
8
|
+
Jira Ticket
|
|
9
|
+
User Story
|
|
10
|
+
Acceptance Criteria
|
|
11
|
+
Business Rules
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
## Instructions
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
1. Analyze the user story.
|
|
16
|
+
2. Identify testing scope.
|
|
17
|
+
3. Identify testing types (functional, regression, smoke, exploratory).
|
|
18
|
+
4. Identify environments required.
|
|
19
|
+
5. Identify test coverage.
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
## Output
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
Generate the Test Plan using the structure from:
|
|
24
|
+
|
|
25
|
+
templates/test-plan-template.md
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Generate Test Scenarios
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
You are a Senior QA Engineer.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Your task is to generate test scenarios from a Jira ticket.
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
## Input
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
User Story
|
|
10
|
+
Acceptance Criteria
|
|
11
|
+
Business Rules
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
## Instructions
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
1. Identify the main user flows.
|
|
16
|
+
2. Identify positive scenarios.
|
|
17
|
+
3. Identify negative scenarios.
|
|
18
|
+
4. Identify edge cases.
|
|
19
|
+
5. Identify UI validations.
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
21
|
+
## Output
|
|
22
|
+
|
|
23
|
+
List of test scenarios.
|