qa

name	qa
description	Run the full end-of-contribution QA review over the current change (the qa-checklist gate plus a coverage fan-out and the domain reviewers it names).
user-invocable	true

You are running the project's end-of-contribution QA gate. Do this now, before the change is called done.

1. Scope the review from the diff: git diff --name-only for uncommitted work. For committed work, merge-base against the branch's own base, never main (work is based off the latest release branch and main trails it, so a merge-base against main sweeps the whole release into scope). Fallback chain: the upstream, else the newest origin/release/* branch, else origin/main:

   base=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref '@{upstream}' 2>/dev/null) ||
     base=$(git for-each-ref --sort=-creatordate --format='%(refname:short)' \
       'refs/remotes/origin/release/*' | head -1)
   git diff --name-only "$(git merge-base HEAD "${base:-origin/main}")"..HEAD
   

   If the user passed an argument (a feature name, phase, or file list), use it to focus the scope.

2. Dispatch the qa-checklist agent over that scope. It is the read-only gate: it scales its own depth to the size of the change, checks every repo invariant in play, and ends with an adversarial "what is missing" pass. Let it run; do not duplicate its work inline.

3. If the change is more than a trivial single-surface edit, also fan out a small coverage pass in parallel: one agent for correctness, one for test coverage, one for dead code, each prompted for COVERAGE (report every gap with confidence and severity), not filtering.

4. Dispatch the domain reviewer agents that qa-checklist names for the surfaces this diff touches (for example privacy-security-review, migration-safety, database-performance-reviewer for SQL, indexes, query call sites, pool or lock behavior, timeout policy, or stored-data growth, cross-platform-sync, architecture-reviewer, and on a release branch release-malware-audit). Spawn them fresh; never have the implementer review its own work.

5. Run the deterministic floor yourself so the verdict rests on green checks, not only agent reasoning: npm run ci:changed (Biome on the changed files), npx tsc --noEmit, and npx vitest run tests/architecture.test.ts tests/localization_fixes.test.ts. Report any red.

6. Adversarially confirm each consequential finding before acting on it (about half of raw findings do not survive a second look). Then fix every BLOCKING and SHOULD-FIX finding, in focused commits. Report what you fixed and what remains as VERIFY (needs a run or E2E) or NICE-TO-HAVE.

End with a one-line verdict: READY or NOT READY, and the list of any VERIFY items the maintainer still has to run by hand (for example npm run perf:tour, npm run test:browser, or the mobile E2E scripts). READY is advisory judgment; node scripts/gate_select.mjs is the deterministic pre-merge contract (same step list as npm run gate with a selective test substitution; release tier on release/**; see docs/qa-gate.md), so if it has not run green this session, list it as the first VERIFY item. npm run gate remains the deeper full-suite check when you want it.