| name | browse-qa |
| version | 2.0.0 |
| description | Turn a ticket, URL, or plain-language spec into an executed QA run AND reusable regression flows —
scenarios and evidence, not ad-hoc clicking — by decomposing the request into happy/error/edge/
exploratory scenarios, driving each against the real target through the `browse` skill (web or
iOS/Android/macOS), capturing pass/fail evidence, and recording cleanly-scoped browse flows worth
rerunning. Saves a flow only when it is well-scoped and valuable, never noisy half-recordings. Use
to QA a feature and leave behind rerunnable coverage.
|
| allowed-tools | ["AskUserQuestion","Bash","Read","Write","Skill"] |
| argument-hint | [feature, ticket, URL, or QA target] |
| arguments | ["request"] |
| when_to_use | Use when the user asks to QA a feature, validate a story, test a page or app flow, or convert manual
QA into rerunnable coverage. Examples: "QA this checkout flow", "validate LINEAR-123", "turn this
manual QA into browse flows". Do NOT use for pure static code review or bug-hunting a diff (find-bugs
/ branch-review-before-pr), nor as the low-level browser driver itself (browse); this owns the QA
plan, evidence, and regression artifacts, and delegates the clicking to browse.
|
| effort | high |
This skill owns the QA plan and report, not the low-level browser command encyclopedia.
Non-negotiable rules:
- Turn the incoming spec into explicit scenarios before testing.
- Confirm ambiguous targets or platforms before execution.
- Use the
browse skill for actual browser or simulator interaction.
- Capture evidence for each failed or important scenario.
- Save rerunnable flows only when they are cleanly scoped and valuable for regression.
browse-qa
Inputs
$request: Ticket, URL, app target, acceptance criteria, or plain-language QA request
Goal
Produce a credible QA run that:
- turns a vague request into explicit scenarios
- runs those scenarios against the real target
- captures evidence for passes and failures
- saves rerunnable browse flows when appropriate
- returns a clean QA report the user can act on
Step 0: Resolve the target and spec
Work out:
- what feature is being tested
- the platform: web, iOS simulator, Android emulator, or macOS app
- the target URL, build artifact, or app identifier
- the acceptance criteria or expected outcomes
If the target or platform is ambiguous, ask before testing.
Success criteria: The QA target and acceptance criteria are explicit.
Step 1: Build the scenario list
Break the request into:
- happy path
- validation or error path
- edge cases
- exploratory probes worth trying after the stated acceptance criteria
Keep the plan small enough to execute in one session unless the user asked for a broad QA sweep.
Success criteria: There is a concrete scenario list with expected outcomes.
Step 2: Execute with the browse skill
Use Skill to invoke browse for:
- navigation
- page stabilization
- interactive element discovery
- clicks, fills, and submissions
- screenshots, console logs, and network inspection
Rules:
- keep the same browse session for one logical user journey unless isolation is intentional
- use headed or handoff mode only for real blockers like CAPTCHA, MFA, or OAuth walls
- save screenshots and flow artifacts under the browse session directories
Success criteria: Each scenario is executed against the real target with enough evidence to judge pass or fail.
Step 3: Record reusable regression flows
When the scenario is stable and worth rerunning:
- record the flow
- split unrelated user journeys into separate flow files
- give each saved flow a descriptive name
Do not save noisy or half-manual recordings as regression artifacts.
Success criteria: Saved flows are independently rerunnable and map to clear scenarios.
Step 4: Report results
For each scenario, record:
- expected result
- actual result
- pass or fail
- evidence such as screenshot path, console error, or network symptom
Also report:
- exploratory findings
- regression flow files created
- blockers that prevented full verification
Success criteria: Another engineer can understand the QA outcome without replaying the whole session first.
Guardrails
- Do not duplicate the full browse command manual inline; use the
browse skill.
- Do not guess a platform when the request is ambiguous.
- Do not save low-signal flows just to say a regression asset was created.
- Do not add
disable-model-invocation; QA should stay available when the user asks for it.
- Do not add
context: fork; results are usually needed in the current execution flow.
Output Contract
Report:
- target tested
- scenarios executed
- pass/fail result for each scenario
- evidence captured
- regression flow files created
- blockers or uncovered gaps
