qa

name	qa
description	Run an iterative QA loop to bridge the gap between Claude's understanding and the user's understanding of a topic. Each iteration is one focused question; the conversation is logged to a durable file written incrementally. Use when the user invokes /qa or says they want to do QA on a topic.

QA workflow

Iterative question-and-answer loop that produces a durable record bridging your understanding of a topic to the user's. Used for context gathering, alignment, and decision-shaping.

Trigger

Invoked by /qa or when the user says they want to do QA on a topic.

Startup

1. If prior conversation context exists: propose a topic + objective drawn from it. Wait for confirmation/edit before proceeding.
2. If no prior context exists: run a small meta-loop (using the same RE/R/Q/A/RA format below, without writing to file) to nail down the objective itself, then proceed.

File location

Propose a path and wait for the user's confirmation before writing.

• Heuristic: place the file near related notes when the topic clearly maps to an existing area (e.g., a QA about something in index/work/foo/ lands as index/work/foo/QA-<timestamp>-<topic-slug>.md).
• Do not create a standalone qa/ folder.
• If no clear home exists, ask the user where to save it.

Filename

QA-YYYY-MM-DDTHHMM-topic-slug.md — full timestamp including time (not just date), slugified topic.

File contents

Intro (written once at file creation)

# QA: <topic>

**Objective:** <what this QA is for, agreed with the user>
**Started:** <full timestamp>

Iteration log (one block appended per turn)

After each answer, write the file imperatively — append the completed block to the file before forming the next question. The file should always reflect the conversation up to the latest answered question.

Block format:

## Q<n>

**RE** — <research notes; only include if you actually researched for context, otherwise omit this line>

**R** — <reasoning on why this question matters now>

**Q** — <one precise, focused question>

**A** — <user's answer, verbatim>

**RA** — <reasoning on the answer: what it tells you, what gap it closed, what new gap it opened>

Loop discipline

• One question at a time. Always. No multi-question turns, no "and also" follow-ups in the same Q.
• After each Q&A, write the iteration block to the file immediately, then form the next question.
• Throughout the loop, track internally "what have I actually learned" so you're ready to write the synthesis on demand.

Termination

• Propose "I think I have enough — want to wrap?" when you sense diminishing returns.
• The user can also stop you at any turn.

Wrap-up

When the user confirms wrap:

1. Append an "Understanding so far" synthesis section to the file, consolidating what you learned across the loop.
2. Present it to the user for review.
3. If the user flags discrepancies → scrap the synthesis section (it means you didn't actually understand) and continue the loop with new questions targeting the gaps. Re-run wrap-up later.
4. If confirmed → done.

Language

Match the language the user is using in the conversation. Don't impose a default.