qaa-agent 1.6.3 → 1.7.0

package/{.claude/skills → skills}/qa-repo-analyzer/SKILL.md

@@ -1,88 +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
+---
+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 → skills}/qa-self-validator/SKILL.md

@@ -1,109 +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
+---
+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 → skills}/qa-template-engine/SKILL.md

@@ -1,113 +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
+---
+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