qa-context-personas

name	qa-context-personas
description	Builds the context an AI needs to test an app well - product/area notes and user personas - and writes them into a reusable reference file. Use to turn a thin, generic AI run into a grounded one. Day 1 context live-build of the QA Foundational training.
argument-hint	[app area to build context for]

QA Context & Personas

Core principle: Context compounds. Garbage context, garbage tests. AI with no context guesses; AI with the right context tests like someone who knows the product. The lift comes from relevant context, not more context.

This skill builds two things into a reference file the other QA skills read:

1. Area context - what this part of the app does, what it is not, key terms, rules, conventions.
2. Personas - who uses it (and one anti-persona), reused later to rank risk by "who is hurt if this breaks."

Workflow

Pre-flight checks

Run these before starting any work:

# 1. Verify playwright-cli is installed
playwright-cli --version

# 2. Ensure playwright-cli skills are installed
playwright-cli install --skills

# 3. Session name — use -s=<output> for all playwright-cli calls this run
node -e "console.log('personas-' + Date.now())"

If playwright-cli is not found, install it by running these two commands separately (chaining with && can fail on Windows):

npm install -g @playwright/cli@latest
playwright-cli install --skills

Use the output from step 3 as your -s= value for every playwright-cli call this run.

Context Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Draft tight area context
- [ ] Step 2: Generate personas (1-2 + one anti-persona)
- [ ] Step 3: Write it to the reference file
- [ ] Step 4: Re-run and compare

Step 1: Draft area context

Write a tight description of the area. Progressive disclosure, not a data dump:

• What it does and what it is explicitly not for.
• Key domain terms and their meaning in this product.
• Known rules/constraints (the non-obvious ones earn their place).
• Testing conventions for this area.

If you can, observe the running app (using playwright-cli) or read the relevant code to ground this - do not invent product facts.

To give visibility into the process go ahead and run a background command playwright-cli show so we can see what the agent is doing.

Step 2: Generate personas

Draft 1-2 primary personas and one anti-persona (someone who misuses or stresses the feature). Each: who they are, what they need, what breaks their day. Review them as a team before keeping - reject generic filler.

## Persona: [name / role]
- **Goal:** ...
- **Cares most about:** ...
- **Hurt if this breaks:** ...   <- this line feeds risk ranking later

Step 3: Write to the reference file

Fold the area context and personas into the skill's reference file (e.g. a reference/*.md the QA skills read, or a layered CLAUDE.md / rules file). Keep it layered and lean. Flag what belongs in a rules file vs a skill reference.

Step 4: Re-run and compare

-> STOP. Re-run the same task against the now-populated reference file. Put the naive output and the grounded output side by side. Name specific improvements - and if it did not improve, that is the lesson too: relevant beats more. Trim and re-run once.

Critical rules

• Relevant context over volume - model restraint, do not stuff.
• Ground product facts in the app or code, not assumption.
• Every persona carries a "hurt if this breaks" line for later risk work.
• Personas reviewed by a human before they are kept.

Anti-patterns

• Dumping everything you know into one giant context blob.
• Generic personas ("busy professional") with no testable stakes.
• Skipping the before/after comparison - the comparison is the lesson.