qaa-agent 1.0.0

package/.claude/settings.json

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+{
+  "permissions": {
+    "allow": [
+      "Bash(*)",
+      "Read",
+      "Write",
+      "Edit",
+      "Glob",
+      "Grep",
+      "Agent",
+      "WebFetch",
+      "WebSearch",
+      "NotebookEdit"
+    ]
+  },
+  "env": {
+    "CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS": "1"
+  }
+}

package/.claude/skills/qa-bug-detective/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+---
+name: qa-bug-detective
+description: QA Bug Detective. Runs generated tests and classifies failures as APPLICATION BUG, TEST CODE ERROR, ENVIRONMENT ISSUE, or INCONCLUSIVE with evidence and confidence levels. Use when user wants to run tests and classify results, investigate test failures, determine if failures are bugs or test issues, debug failing tests, triage test results, or understand why tests are failing. Triggers on "run tests", "classify failures", "why is this failing", "test failures", "debug tests", "triage results", "is this a bug or test error", "investigate failures".
+---
+
+# QA Bug Detective
+
+## Purpose
+
+Run generated tests and classify every failure into one of four categories with evidence and confidence levels. Auto-fix TEST CODE ERRORS when confidence is HIGH.
+
+## Classification Decision Tree
+
+```
+Test fails
+├── Syntax/import error in TEST file?
+│   └── YES → TEST CODE ERROR
+├── Error occurs in PRODUCTION code path?
+│   ├── Known bug / unexpected behavior? → APPLICATION BUG
+│   └── Code works as designed but test expectation wrong? → TEST CODE ERROR
+├── Connection refused / timeout / missing env var?
+│   └── YES → ENVIRONMENT ISSUE
+└── Can't determine?
+    └── INCONCLUSIVE
+```
+
+## Classification Categories
+
+### APPLICATION BUG
+- Error manifests in production code (not test code)
+- Stack trace points to src/ or app/ code
+- Behavior contradicts documented requirements or API contracts
+- **Action**: Report only. NEVER auto-fix application code.
+
+### TEST CODE ERROR
+- Import/require fails (wrong path, missing module)
+- Selector doesn't match current DOM
+- Assertion expects wrong value (test written incorrectly)
+- Missing await, wrong API usage, stale fixture reference
+- **Action**: Auto-fix if HIGH confidence. Report if MEDIUM or lower.
+
+### ENVIRONMENT ISSUE
+- Connection refused (database, API, external service)
+- Timeout waiting for resource
+- Missing environment variable
+- File/directory not found (test infrastructure)
+- **Action**: Report with suggested resolution steps.
+
+### INCONCLUSIVE
+- Error is ambiguous
+- Could be multiple root causes
+- Insufficient data to classify
+- **Action**: Report with what's known, request more info.
+
+## Evidence Requirements
+
+Every classification MUST include:
+1. **File path**: Exact file where error occurs
+2. **Line number**: Specific line of failure
+3. **Error message**: Complete error text
+4. **Code snippet**: The specific code proving the classification
+5. **Confidence level**: HIGH / MEDIUM-HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
+6. **Reasoning**: Why this classification, not another
+
+## Confidence Levels
+
+| Level | Definition |
+|-------|------------|
+| HIGH | Clear evidence in one direction, no ambiguity |
+| MEDIUM-HIGH | Strong evidence but minor ambiguity |
+| MEDIUM | Evidence points one way but alternatives exist |
+| LOW | Insufficient data, multiple possible causes |
+
+## Auto-Fix Rules
+
+Only auto-fix when:
+- Classification = TEST CODE ERROR
+- Confidence = HIGH
+- Fix is mechanical (import path, selector, assertion value, config)
+
+Fix types:
+- Import path corrections
+- Selector updates (match current DOM/data-testid)
+- Assertion value updates (match current actual behavior)
+- Config fixes (baseURL, timeout values)
+- Missing await keywords
+- Fixture path corrections
+
+**NEVER auto-fix**: Application bugs, environment issues, anything with confidence < HIGH.
+
+## Output: FAILURE_CLASSIFICATION_REPORT.md
+
+```markdown
+# Failure Classification Report
+
+## Summary
+| Classification | Count | Auto-Fixed | Needs Attention |
+|---------------|-------|-----------|----------------|
+| APPLICATION BUG | N | 0 | N |
+| TEST CODE ERROR | N | N | N |
+| ENVIRONMENT ISSUE | N | 0 | N |
+| INCONCLUSIVE | N | 0 | N |
+
+## Detailed Analysis
+
+### Failure 1: [test name]
+- **Classification**: [category]
+- **Confidence**: [level]
+- **File**: [path]:[line]
+- **Error**: [message]
+- **Evidence**: [code snippet + reasoning]
+- **Action Taken**: [auto-fixed / reported]
+- **Resolution**: [what was fixed / what needs human attention]
+```
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] Every failure classified with evidence
+- [ ] Confidence level assigned to each
+- [ ] No application bugs auto-fixed
+- [ ] Auto-fixes only applied at HIGH confidence
+- [ ] FAILURE_CLASSIFICATION_REPORT.md produced

package/.claude/skills/qa-repo-analyzer/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+---
+name: qa-repo-analyzer
+description: QA Repository Analyzer. Analyzes a dev repository and produces a complete QA baseline package including testability report, test inventory, and repo blueprint. Use when user wants to analyze a repo for testing, assess testability, generate test inventory, create QA baseline, understand test coverage needs, evaluate a codebase for QA, or produce a testing strategy. Triggers on "analyze repo", "testability report", "test inventory", "QA analysis", "QA baseline", "coverage assessment", "what should we test", "testing strategy".
+---
+
+# QA Repository Analyzer
+
+## Purpose
+
+Analyze a developer repository and produce a complete QA baseline package: Testability Report, Test Inventory (pyramid-based), and QA Repo Blueprint.
+
+## Core Rule
+
+**Every analysis must be specific to the actual codebase — never generic advice. Every test case must have an explicit expected outcome.**
+
+## Execution Steps
+
+### Step 0: Collect Repo Context
+
+Scan the repository systematically:
+- Folder tree (entry points, structure)
+- Package files (dependencies, scripts, framework detection)
+- Service/controller files (API surface area)
+- Model files (data structures, validation)
+- Database layer (ORM, migrations, schemas)
+- External integrations (payment, email, storage, queues)
+- Existing test coverage (test files, config, CI)
+- Configuration (env vars, feature flags)
+
+### Step 1: Pre-Analysis — Assumptions & Questions
+
+Before generating deliverables, list:
+- **Assumptions**: What you're inferring from the code (e.g., "Auth uses JWT based on middleware")
+- **Questions**: What's ambiguous (e.g., "Is the Stripe integration in production or test mode?")
+
+Present to user for confirmation before proceeding.
+
+### Step 2: Deliverable A — QA_ANALYSIS.md (Testability Report)
+
+Produce with ALL these sections:
+- **Architecture Overview**: System type, language, runtime, entry points table, internal layers
+- **External Dependencies**: Table with purpose and risk level (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW)
+- **Risk Assessment**: Prioritized risks with justification
+- **Top 10 Unit Test Targets**: Table with module/function, why it's high-priority, complexity assessment
+- **API/Contract Test Targets**: Endpoints that need contract testing
+- **Recommended Testing Pyramid**: Percentages adjusted to this specific app's architecture
+
+### Step 3: Deliverable B — TEST_INVENTORY.md (Test Cases)
+
+Generate pyramid-based test inventory:
+
+**Unit Tests** (60-70%): For each target:
+- Test ID (UT-MODULE-NNN)
+- Target (file path + function)
+- What to validate
+- Concrete inputs
+- Mocks needed
+- Explicit expected outcome
+
+**Integration/Contract Tests** (10-15%): Component interactions, API contracts
+
+**API Tests** (20-25%): For each endpoint:
+- Test ID (API-RESOURCE-NNN)
+- Method + endpoint
+- Request body/params
+- Expected status + response shape
+
+**E2E Smoke Tests** (3-5%): Max 3-8 critical user paths
+
+### Step 4: QA_REPO_BLUEPRINT.md
+
+If no QA repo exists, generate:
+- Suggested repo name and folder structure
+- Recommended stack (framework, runner, reporter)
+- Config files needed
+- Execution scripts (npm scripts, CI commands)
+- CI/CD strategy (smoke on PR, regression nightly)
+- Definition of Done checklist
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] Architecture overview matches actual codebase (not generic)
+- [ ] Every test case has explicit expected outcome with concrete values
+- [ ] No vague assertions ("works correctly", "returns proper data")
+- [ ] Test IDs follow naming convention
+- [ ] Priority (P0/P1/P2) assigned to every test case
+- [ ] Risks are specific with evidence from the code
+- [ ] Testing pyramid percentages are justified for this architecture

package/.claude/skills/qa-self-validator/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
+---
+name: qa-self-validator
+description: QA Self Validator. Closed-loop agent that validates generated test code across 4 layers (syntax, structure, dependencies, logic) and auto-fixes issues. Use when user wants to validate tests, check test quality, verify test code compiles, ensure tests follow standards, run quality checks on test suite, or verify generated tests before delivery. Triggers on "validate tests", "check test quality", "verify tests", "test validation", "quality check", "does it compile", "are tests valid", "check my tests".
+---
+
+# QA Self Validator
+
+## Purpose
+
+Closed-loop validation agent: Generate -> Validate -> Fix -> Deliver. Never deliver test code without at least one validation pass.
+
+## Core Rule
+
+**NEVER deliver generated QA code without running at least one validation pass. Max 3 fix loops before escalating.**
+
+## Validation Layers
+
+### Layer 1: Syntax
+Run the appropriate checker based on language:
+- TypeScript: `tsc --noEmit`
+- JavaScript: `node --check [file]`
+- Python: `python -m py_compile [file]`
+- C#: `dotnet build --no-restore`
+- Also run project linter if configured (eslint, flake8, etc.)
+
+**Pass criteria**: Zero syntax errors.
+
+### Layer 2: Structure
+Check each test file for:
+- Correct directory placement (e2e in e2e/, unit in unit/, etc.)
+- Naming convention compliance (CLAUDE.md patterns)
+- Has actual test functions (not empty describe blocks)
+- Imports reference real modules in the codebase
+- No hardcoded secrets/credentials/tokens
+- Page objects in pages/ directory, tests in tests/
+
+**Pass criteria**: All structural checks pass.
+
+### Layer 3: Dependencies
+Verify:
+- All imports resolvable (modules exist at the referenced paths)
+- Packages listed in package.json/requirements.txt
+- No missing dependencies
+- No circular dependencies in test helpers
+- Test fixtures reference existing fixture files
+
+**Pass criteria**: All imports resolve, all packages available.
+
+### Layer 4: Logic Quality
+Check test logic:
+- Happy path tests have positive assertions (toBe, toEqual, toHaveText)
+- Error/negative tests have negative assertions (not.toBe, toThrow, status >= 400)
+- Setup and teardown are symmetric (what's created is cleaned up)
+- No duplicate test IDs across the suite
+- Assertions are concrete — reject: toBeTruthy(), toBeDefined(), .should('exist')
+- Each test has at least one assertion
+
+**Pass criteria**: All logic checks pass.
+
+## Fix Loop Protocol
+
+```
+Loop 1: Generate tests
+     -> Run all 4 validation layers
+     -> If PASS: Deliver
+     -> If FAIL: Identify issues, fix, continue
+
+Loop 2: Re-validate after fixes
+     -> If PASS: Deliver
+     -> If FAIL: Identify remaining issues, fix
+
+Loop 3: Final validation
+     -> If PASS: Deliver
+     -> If FAIL: Deliver with VALIDATION_REPORT noting unresolved issues
+```
+
+## Output: VALIDATION_REPORT.md
+
+```markdown
+# Validation Report
+
+## Summary
+| Layer | Status | Issues Found | Issues Fixed |
+|-------|--------|-------------|-------------|
+| Syntax | PASS/FAIL | N | N |
+| Structure | PASS/FAIL | N | N |
+| Dependencies | PASS/FAIL | N | N |
+| Logic | PASS/FAIL | N | N |
+
+## File Details
+### [filename]
+| Layer | Status | Details |
+|-------|--------|---------|
+| ... | ... | ... |
+
+## Unresolved Issues
+[Any issues that couldn't be auto-fixed after 3 loops]
+
+## Confidence Level
+[HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW with reasoning]
+```
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] All 4 layers checked for every file
+- [ ] Fix loop executed (max 3 iterations)
+- [ ] VALIDATION_REPORT.md produced
+- [ ] No test delivered with syntax errors
+- [ ] Unresolved issues clearly documented

package/.claude/skills/qa-template-engine/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+---
+name: qa-template-engine
+description: QA Template Engine. Creates production-ready test files with POM pattern, explicit assertions, and proper structure. Use when user wants to generate test files, create test templates, write test code, scaffold test suites, produce executable tests, or create test specs from an inventory. Triggers on "generate tests", "create test files", "write tests", "scaffold tests", "test templates", "produce test code", "executable tests", "create test spec".
+---
+
+# QA Template Engine
+
+## Purpose
+
+Create definitive, production-ready test files with explicit expected outcomes, proper POM architecture, and framework-specific best practices.
+
+## Core Rule
+
+**NO test case is complete without an expected outcome that a junior QA engineer could verify without asking questions.**
+
+## Framework Detection
+
+Before generating ANY code:
+1. Check for existing config: playwright.config.ts, cypress.config.ts, jest.config.ts, vitest.config.ts, pytest.ini
+2. Check package.json/requirements.txt for test dependencies
+3. Check existing test files for patterns and conventions
+4. **Always match the project's existing framework**
+
+If no framework exists, ask the user.
+
+## Test Template Categories
+
+### Unit Test Template
+```
+Test ID: UT-[MODULE]-[NNN]
+Target: [file]:[function]
+Priority: P[0-2]
+
+// Arrange
+const input = [concrete value];
+const expected = [concrete value];
+
+// Act
+const result = functionUnderTest(input);
+
+// Assert
+expect(result).toBe(expected); // NEVER toBeTruthy/toBeDefined
+```
+
+### API Test Template
+```
+Test ID: API-[RESOURCE]-[NNN]
+Target: [METHOD] [endpoint]
+Priority: P[0-2]
+
+// Arrange
+const payload = { [concrete data] };
+
+// Act
+const response = await api.[method]('[endpoint]', payload);
+
+// Assert
+expect(response.status).toBe([exact code]);
+expect(response.body.[field]).toBe('[exact value]');
+```
+
+### E2E Test Template (Playwright)
+```
+Test ID: E2E-[FLOW]-[NNN]
+Target: [user flow description]
+Priority: P[0-2]
+
+// Arrange
+await loginPage.navigate();
+
+// Act
+await loginPage.login('[email]', '[password]');
+
+// Assert
+await expect(dashboardPage.welcomeMessage).toHaveText('Welcome, Test User');
+```
+
+## POM Generation Rules
+
+Following CLAUDE.md strictly:
+1. One class per page — no god objects
+2. No assertions in page objects — assertions in test specs ONLY
+3. Locators as readonly properties — Tier 1 preferred (data-testid, ARIA roles)
+4. Actions return void or next page
+5. State queries return data
+6. Every POM extends BasePage
+
+## Locator Priority
+
+Always use this order:
+1. data-testid: `page.getByTestId('login-submit-btn')`
+2. ARIA role: `page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Log in' })`
+3. Label/placeholder: `page.getByLabel('Email')`
+4. CSS selector: `page.locator('.btn')` + `// TODO: Request test ID`
+
+## Expected Outcome Rules
+
+- **Be specific**: Exact values, status codes, text content
+- **Be measurable**: Timing thresholds, counts, lengths
+- **Be negative too**: What should NOT happen
+- **Include state transitions**: Before/after states
+- **Reference test data**: Use fixture values, not magic strings
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] Every test has explicit expected outcome with concrete value
+- [ ] No vague words: "correct", "proper", "appropriate", "works"
+- [ ] All locators follow tier hierarchy
+- [ ] No assertions inside page objects
+- [ ] No hardcoded credentials
+- [ ] File naming follows project conventions
+- [ ] Test IDs are unique and follow convention
+- [ ] Priority (P0/P1/P2) assigned to every test

package/.claude/skills/qa-testid-injector/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+---
+name: qa-testid-injector
+description: QA Test ID Injector. Scans source code to find interactive UI elements missing data-testid attributes and injects them following naming convention. Use when user wants to add test IDs, improve testability, audit missing test hooks, prepare for E2E automation, or add data-testid attributes before writing Playwright/Cypress tests. Triggers on "add test IDs", "add data-testid", "test hooks", "missing testid", "testability audit", "prepare for automation", "inject test attributes", "make components testable".
+---
+
+# QA Test ID Injector
+
+## Purpose
+
+Scan application source code, identify interactive UI elements lacking stable test selectors, and inject `data-testid` attributes following a consistent naming convention. Runs as **Step 0** — before any test generation.
+
+## Core Rule
+
+**Every interactive element MUST have a stable, unique `data-testid` before E2E tests are generated against it.**
+
+## Naming Convention
+
+Pattern: `{context}-{description}-{element-type}` in kebab-case.
+
+### Element Type Suffixes
+
+| Element | Suffix | Example |
+|---------|--------|---------|
+| button | -btn | login-submit-btn |
+| input | -input | login-email-input |
+| select | -select | settings-language-select |
+| textarea | -textarea | feedback-comment-textarea |
+| link | -link | navbar-profile-link |
+| form | -form | checkout-payment-form |
+| img | -img | product-hero-img |
+| table | -table | users-list-table |
+| row | -row | users-item-row |
+| modal | -modal | confirm-delete-modal |
+| container | -container | dashboard-stats-container |
+| list | -list | notifications-list |
+| item | -item | notifications-item |
+| dropdown | -dropdown | navbar-user-dropdown |
+| tab | -tab | settings-security-tab |
+| checkbox | -checkbox | terms-accept-checkbox |
+| radio | -radio | shipping-express-radio |
+| toggle | -toggle | notifications-enabled-toggle |
+| badge | -badge | cart-count-badge |
+| alert | -alert | error-validation-alert |
+
+### Context Derivation
+
+1. **Page-level**: From component filename or route (LoginPage.tsx -> login)
+2. **Component-level**: From component name (<NavBar> -> navbar)
+3. **Nested**: Parent -> child hierarchy, max 3 levels deep
+4. **Dynamic lists**: Use template literals with unique keys
+
+## Execution Phases
+
+### Phase 1: SCAN
+- Detect framework (React/Vue/Angular/HTML) from package.json and file extensions
+- List all component files (exclude test/spec/stories)
+- Prioritize by interaction density (forms > pages > layouts)
+- Output: SCAN_MANIFEST.md
+
+### Phase 2: AUDIT
+- For each file, identify interactive elements
+- Classify: P0 (must have), P1 (should have), P2 (nice to have)
+- Record existing data-testid as EXISTING (don't modify)
+- Record missing as MISSING with proposed value
+- Output: TESTID_AUDIT_REPORT.md
+
+### Phase 3: INJECT
+- Add data-testid as LAST attribute before closing >
+- Preserve all existing formatting
+- Only add the attribute — change nothing else
+- Framework-specific handling (JSX, Vue, Angular, HTML)
+- Output: INJECTION_CHANGELOG.md + modified source files
+
+### Phase 4: VALIDATE
+- Syntax check all modified files
+- Uniqueness check (no duplicate testids per page)
+- Convention compliance check
+- Output: INJECTION_VALIDATION.md
+
+## Third-Party Components
+
+1. Props passthrough (if library supports it) — direct data-testid
+2. Wrapper div (if no passthrough) — wrap with data-testid div
+3. inputProps/slotProps (MUI-specific) — use component-specific prop APIs
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] Every interactive element has a data-testid
+- [ ] All values follow {context}-{description}-{element-type} convention
+- [ ] No duplicate data-testid values in same page/route scope
+- [ ] No existing code modified beyond adding the attribute
+- [ ] Syntax validation passes on all modified files
+- [ ] Dynamic list items use template literals with unique keys

package/.claude/skills/qa-workflow-documenter/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+---
+name: qa-workflow-documenter
+description: QA Workflow Documenter. Generates structured QA workflow documentation with decision trees, playbooks, and AI interaction protocols. Use when user wants to document QA processes, create testing playbooks, define workflow steps, document QA procedures, create decision trees for testing, or standardize QA processes. Triggers on "document workflow", "QA process", "testing playbook", "workflow documentation", "QA procedures", "decision tree", "standardize process", "document QA steps".
+---
+
+# QA Workflow Documenter
+
+## Purpose
+
+Generate structured, AI-specific QA workflow documentation with decision trees, playbooks, and AI interaction protocols. Every step answers: WHO does it, WHAT they do, WHAT input they need, WHAT output they produce.
+
+## Core Principle
+
+**AI-first language**: Use precise verbs — scan, extract, classify, generate, validate. Never use vague terms like "review", "check", "handle".
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+1. **WORKFLOW_[NAME].md** — Step-by-step workflow with decision gates
+2. **DECISION_TREE.md** — Visual decision trees for key branch points
+3. **AI_PROMPTS_CATALOG.md** — Reusable prompt patterns for each workflow step
+4. **CHECKLIST.md** — Pre/post verification checklists
+
+## Workflow Template Structure
+
+### Header Block
+```markdown
+# Workflow: [Name]
+**Version**: [semver]
+**Applies to**: [project types / tech stacks]
+**Prerequisites**: [what must exist before starting]
+**Estimated duration**: [time range]
+**Actors**: [AI Agent, QA Engineer, Team Lead]
+```
+
+### Step Format
+```markdown
+## Step N: [Name]
+**Actor**: [who executes this step]
+**Input**: [what they receive]
+**Action**: [precise description using action verbs]
+**Output**: [what they produce]
+**Decision Gate**: [condition to proceed vs branch]
+
+### AI Prompt Pattern
+[If this step involves an AI agent, include the prompt template]
+```
+
+## Workflow Types
+
+### 1. Repository Intake Workflow
+New repo arrives -> scan -> classify -> assess risk -> recommend strategy
+
+### 2. Test Case Generation Workflow
+Analysis done -> select targets -> generate cases -> validate -> deliver
+
+### 3. QA Repo Bootstrap Workflow
+Blueprint ready -> create structure -> generate configs -> seed initial tests
+
+### 4. Validation & Bug Triage Workflow
+Tests generated -> run -> classify failures -> fix loop -> report
+
+### 5. Test Maintenance Workflow
+Existing tests -> audit -> prioritize fixes -> apply -> verify
+
+## Decision Tree Format
+
+```markdown
+## Decision: [What decision]
+
+```
+[Question]?
+├── YES → [Action A]
+│   └── [Sub-question]?
+│       ├── YES → [Action A1]
+│       └── NO → [Action A2]
+└── NO → [Action B]
+```
+```
+
+## Quality Gate
+
+- [ ] Every step has Actor, Input, Action, Output
+- [ ] No vague verbs (review → scan + classify, check → validate against criteria)
+- [ ] Decision gates have clear YES/NO branches
+- [ ] AI prompt patterns included for AI-executed steps
+- [ ] Prerequisites listed for every workflow
+- [ ] Output artifacts named and described