QA review

Audit the consistency of a change across behavior, validation, handoffs, and operational risk.

Canonical skill profile. This page is generated from the repository contract. The linked SKILL.md remains the source of authority.

Jump to

• Overview
• When to use
• When not to use
• Core moves
• Expected output
• Verification
• Handoff signals
• Pairs well with
• Anti-patterns

View the canonical contract on GitHub.

Overview

Use this skill after a meaningful change or before sign-off when you need a systems view of quality rather than a file-by-file check.

When to Use

• pre-release review
• cross-functional change review
• regression suspicion

When NOT to Use

• as a replacement for direct implementation or test execution

Core Moves

1. Check the intended path end to end.
2. Look for mismatches between layers or owners.
3. Classify operational risk and severity.
4. State whether the issue blocks progress.

Optional Modules

• Handoff audit — Review whether boundary-crossing work left unresolved ownership behind.
• Regression lens — Focus on what likely broke around the changed path.
• Evidence gap — Name what is still unproven before closure.

Activation Triggers

• Use handoff audit when more than one specialty touched the work.
• Use regression lens when shared dependencies changed.
• Use evidence gap when confidence is coming from intuition instead of proof.

Expected Output

• quality findings
• severity
• block/no-block recommendation

Verification

• The review checks system behavior, not only code artifacts.
• Severity is tied to user or operational impact.
• The recommendation is explicit.

Handoff Signals

• A specific team or specialty must close a gap before release.
• The issue is not primarily QA but product, design, or architecture.

Pairs Well With

• testing
• communication
• triad-check

Anti-patterns

• Reporting issues with no severity or consequence.
• Using QA review as a substitute for proof.
• Calling something “fine” because no one looked closely enough.