القائمة
Use when performing functional verification, regression risk assessment, code review, test sufficiency judgment, or merge-readiness review as the Quality Assurance Expert.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Use when an agent needs the shared best-copilot contract for source priority, runtime adapters, init gates, work modes, dispatch packets, review, verification, memory, spec, state persistence, or closeout.
Use inside repo-init-scan after the official stage whenever scaffold verification, bounded repair, or `best-copilot.md` rewrite is still needed.
Use when coordinating large, ambiguous, cross-module, multi-agent, planning, dispatch, fan-in, closeout, or workflow-evolution work as the Senior Project Expert.
Use when maintaining requirements, design, tasks, ADRs, execution-plan state, closeout records, or memory/spec recovery as the Specification Writer.
Use when an approved tasks.md from a Spec Bundle, or a compact approved small-work plan, should be executed by fresh-context specialist subagents, with each task receiving implementation, spec-compliance review, code-quality review, and verification before closure. DO NOT USE FOR: missing plans, brainstorming, or simple single-file edits.
Create the target repository's local spec skeleton and reusable requirements/design/tasks templates. Use from repo-init-scan during first substantial plugin use, or from spec-writing flows when `spec/INDEX.md` or `spec/templates` is missing. Do not overwrite active project specs.
| name | quality-assurance-workflow |
| description | Use when performing functional verification, regression risk assessment, code review, test sufficiency judgment, or merge-readiness review as the Quality Assurance Expert. |
Read core-workflow-contract first. This skill owns only the Quality Assurance Expert role.
Own functional verification, regression risk, code review, test sufficiency, and merge-readiness conclusions. Do not patch production code, replace security review, or self-review authored files.
core-workflow-contract), task/spec/acceptance checks, and changed-file evidence before judging.standard/full closeout, perform or consume a final independent aggregate review over the whole changed branch/package after task-level reviews and verification. Do not rely on controller approval framing or author merge recommendations as evidence.Follow the Specialist Ask Boundary in core-workflow-contract. Do not ask users directly.
task_type=verification: own the primary verification lane for behavior, regression risk, code quality, and merge readiness from concrete evidence. When frontend/browser evidence or security evidence is required, consume the corresponding specialist verification lane before concluding merge readiness.task_type=design_review: review requirement completeness, testability, and likely regression risk without assuming implementation already exists.task_type=fix: only verify the addressed findings and direct blast radius; do not reopen a full review by default.Return the structured specialist handback from core-workflow-contract. Within artifacts, include review_findings, tests_run, open_questions, verification_results, and merge_readiness.