End-to-end local git and PR workflow: branching, committing, rebasing, conflict resolution, pushing, creating PRs, and processing review feedback. Use when creating a branch, writing commits, rebasing, resolving conflicts, opening a PR, or submitting changes for review. NOT FOR: GitHub API operations like listing issues, searching code, or reading PR reviews (github-mcp).
Write, rewrite, review, and improve Jira ticket content quality. USE FOR: crafting ticket titles, descriptions, acceptance criteria, and story structure. Use when user says 'write a Jira ticket', 'turn this into a ticket', 'review this ticket', 'is this ticket clear enough', or 'improve acceptance criteria'. NOT FOR: API operations like creating/searching/transitioning issues in Jira (atlassian-mcp). This skill handles content quality, not CRUD.
Web automation via Playwright MCP browser tools. USE FOR: filling forms, clicking buttons, navigating pages, interacting with web UIs, browser automation tasks. ALWAYS use when user asks to automate browser actions, fill out a form, click through a wizard, or interact with a website.
End-to-end local git and PR workflow: branching, committing, rebasing, conflict resolution, pushing, creating PRs, and processing review feedback. Use when creating a branch, writing commits, rebasing, resolving conflicts, opening a PR, or submitting changes for review. NOT FOR: GitHub API operations like listing issues, searching code, or reading PR reviews (github-mcp).
Manual QA execution workflow. USE FOR: creating and running QA checks from Jira tickets, PR diffs, local changes, preview URLs, or regression risk. Use when asked for manual QA, QA plan, QA checklist, test instructions, or functional/regression validation beyond automated tests.
Frontend UI validation methodology after implementation. USE FOR: verifying visual correctness, runtime health, design comparison, regression checks, and deciding pass/fail after code changes. ALWAYS use when a ticket has UI impact and needs browser-level validation before PR.
Decide how to package a unit of work into reviewable pull requests — one PR or a stack — and carry it out. USE FOR: should this be one PR or several, planning a ticket as multiple PRs, stacking PRs, splitting a PR into two, breaking up a large PR, extracting a refactor from a feature PR, making a big diff easier to review. Use when scoping a ticket's delivery, when a change grows too large, or when the user asks to split, stack, or break up a pull request.
Proactive code review using a repo-local review ledger, line-by-line changed-hunk inspection, file-type lenses, and a 4-layer heuristic: surface correctness, test coverage gaps, bounded refactors, and architecture attention signals. USE FOR: reviewing PRs, review this PR for missing tests, self-review before creating a PR, evaluating changed files. Use when user says "review this", "check this PR", "anything I missed", "review my changes", or asks for line-by-line code review.