菜单
QCSD Ideation phase swarm for Quality Criteria sessions using HTSM v6.3, Risk Storming, and Testability analysis before development begins. Uses 5-tier browser cascade: Vibium → agent-browser → Playwright+Stealth → WebFetch → WebSearch-fallback.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Evaluates code quality through complexity analysis, lint results, code smell detection, and test health metrics. Use when assessing deployment readiness, configuring quality gates, scoring a codebase for release, or generating quality reports with pass/fail verdicts.
Evaluates code quality through complexity analysis, lint results, code smell detection, and test health metrics. Use when assessing deployment readiness, configuring quality gates, scoring a codebase for release, or generating quality reports with pass/fail verdicts.
Generates durable-first tests — invariants, contracts, and property-based tests at boundaries that survive a reimplementation — plus unit, integration, and e2e coverage. Use when creating tests for new or changed code, filling coverage gaps, or migrating test suites between Jest, Vitest, and Playwright.
Generates durable-first tests — invariants, contracts, and property-based tests at boundaries that survive a reimplementation — plus unit, integration, and e2e coverage. Use when creating tests for new or changed code, filling coverage gaps, or migrating test suites between Jest, Vitest, and Playwright.
Builds semantic code indexes, maps dependency graphs, and performs intelligent code search across large codebases. Use when understanding unfamiliar code, tracing call chains, analyzing import dependencies, or reducing context window usage through targeted retrieval.
Knowledge graph-based code understanding with semantic search and 80% token reduction through intelligent context retrieval.
| inclusion | auto |
| name | qcsd-ideation-swarm |
| description | QCSD Ideation phase swarm for Quality Criteria sessions using HTSM v6.3, Risk Storming, and Testability analysis before development begins. Uses 5-tier browser cascade: Vibium → agent-browser → Playwright+Stealth → WebFetch → WebSearch-fallback. |
| tags | ["qcsd","ideation","htsm","quality-criteria","risk-storming","testability","swarm","parallel","ddd"] |
Shift-left quality engineering swarm for PI Planning and Sprint Planning.
When analyzing a live website URL, use this specialized execution pattern.
URL: Website to analyze (required)OUTPUT_FOLDER: Where to save reports (default: ${PROJECT_ROOT}/Agentic QCSD/{domain}/ or ./Agentic QCSD/{domain}/)You MUST follow ALL phases in order. Skipping phases is a FAILURE.
The browser cascade is now FULLY AUTOMATED via scripts/fetch-content.js.
Single command - automatic tier fallback with 30s timeout per tier:
# SINGLE COMMAND - handles all tiers automatically:
# Use npx for installed package, or node with relative path for local development
npx aqe fetch-content "${URL}" "${OUTPUT_FOLDER}" --timeout 30000
# OR if running from project root:
node ./scripts/fetch-content.js "${URL}" "${OUTPUT_FOLDER}" --timeout 30000
What the script does automatically:
content.html, screenshot.png, and fetch-result.jsonExecution:
// 1. Run the automated fetch cascade (use relative path from project root)
const fetchResult = Bash({
command: `node ./scripts/fetch-content.js "${URL}" "${OUTPUT_FOLDER}" --timeout 30000`,
timeout: 120000 // 2 min total max
})
// 2. Parse the JSON result from stdout
const result = JSON.parse(fetchResult.stdout)
// 3. Read the content
const content = Read({ file_path: `${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/content.html` })
const fetchMethod = result.tier
const contentSize = result.contentSize
If script is not available, fall back to inline Playwright:
// FALLBACK: Only if scripts/fetch-content.js doesn't exist
Bash({ command: `mkdir -p "${OUTPUT_FOLDER}"` })
// Quick Playwright fetch (single tier, no cascade)
Bash({
command: `cd /tmp && rm -rf qcsd-fetch && mkdir qcsd-fetch && cd qcsd-fetch && npm init -y && npm install playwright-extra puppeteer-extra-plugin-stealth playwright 2>/dev/null`,
timeout: 60000
})
// ... minimal inline script as last resort
MANDATORY: Output fetch method used:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CONTENT FETCH RESULT │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Method Used: [vibium/agent-browser/playwright/webfetch/ │
│ websearch-fallback] │
│ Content Size: [X KB] │
│ Status: [SUCCESS/DEGRADED] │
│ │
│ If DEGRADED (websearch-fallback), analysis is based on │
│ public information, not live page inspection. │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
You MUST detect flags from the fetched content. Do NOT skip this phase.
// Detect HAS_UI
const HAS_UI = (
/<(form|button|input|select|textarea|img|video|canvas|nav|header|footer|aside)/i.test(content) ||
/carousel|slider|modal|dialog|dropdown|menu|tab|accordion/i.test(content) ||
/class=["'][^"']*btn|button|card|grid|flex/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_SECURITY
const HAS_SECURITY = (
/login|password|auth|token|session|credential|oauth|jwt|sso/i.test(content) ||
/newsletter|subscribe|signup|email.*input|register/i.test(content) || // PII collection
/payment|checkout|credit.*card|billing/i.test(content) ||
/cookie|consent|gdpr|privacy/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_UX
const HAS_UX = (
/user|customer|visitor|journey|experience|engagement/i.test(content) ||
/<form/i.test(content) && /<button/i.test(content) || // Interactive forms
/onboarding|wizard|step.*step|progress/i.test(content) ||
/feedback|rating|review|comment/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_VIDEO (for a11y-ally follow-up recommendation)
const HAS_VIDEO = (
/<video/i.test(content) ||
/youtube\.com\/embed|vimeo\.com|wistia\.com/i.test(content) ||
/\.mp4|\.webm|\.m3u8/i.test(content) ||
/data-video-url|data-mobile-url|data-desktop-url/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_MIDDLEWARE
const HAS_MIDDLEWARE = (
/middleware|ESB|message.?broker|MQ|Kafka|RabbitMQ/i.test(content) ||
/integration.?bus|API.?gateway|message.?queue|pub.?sub/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION
const HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION = (
/\bSAP\b|RFC|BAPI|IDoc|OData|S\/4HANA/i.test(content) ||
/\bEWM\b|\bECC\b|\bABAP\b|CDS.?view|Fiori/i.test(content)
);
// Detect HAS_AUTHORIZATION
const HAS_AUTHORIZATION = (
/\bSoD\b|segregation.?of.?duties|role.?conflict/i.test(content) ||
/authorization.?object|T-?code|user.?role/i.test(content) ||
/access.?control.?matrix|\bGRC\b/i.test(content)
);
You MUST output flag detection results before proceeding:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ FLAG DETECTION RESULTS │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ HAS_UI: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ HAS_SECURITY: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ HAS_UX: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ HAS_VIDEO: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [video URLs found - for a11y follow-up] │
│ │
│ HAS_MIDDLEWARE: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ HAS_AUTHORIZATION: [TRUE/FALSE] │
│ Evidence: [what triggered it - specific patterns] │
│ │
│ EXPECTED AGENTS: │
│ - Core: 3 (always) │
│ - Conditional: [count based on TRUE flags] │
│ - TOTAL: [3 + conditional count] │
│ │
│ FOLLOW-UP RECOMMENDED: │
│ - /a11y-ally: [YES if HAS_VIDEO=TRUE, else NO] │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
❌ DO NOT proceed to Phase URL-3 without outputting flag detection results.
All 3 core agents MUST be spawned. Fewer is a FAILURE.
Spawn ALL THREE in a single message:
// Agent 1: Quality Criteria (HTSM v6.3)
Task({
description: "QCSD Quality Criteria Analysis",
prompt: `You are qe-quality-criteria-recommender analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Analyze ALL 10 HTSM v6.3 categories with weight and testability score for each.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/02-quality-criteria-analysis.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing
3. Report MUST be complete - no placeholders`,
subagent_type: "qe-quality-criteria-recommender",
run_in_background: true
})
// Agent 2: Risk Assessment (SFDIPOT)
Task({
description: "QCSD Risk Assessment",
prompt: `You are qe-risk-assessor analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Apply SFDIPOT framework: Structure, Function, Data, Interfaces, Platform, Operations, Time.
Identify minimum 10 risks with probability, impact, and score.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/04-risk-assessment.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing
3. Report MUST be complete - no placeholders`,
subagent_type: "qe-risk-assessor",
run_in_background: true
})
// Agent 3: Requirements Validator (Testability)
Task({
description: "QCSD Testability Assessment",
prompt: `You are qe-requirements-validator analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Apply 10 Principles of Testability. Score each principle 0-100.
Identify blockers and recommendations.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/03-testability-assessment.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing
3. Report MUST be complete - no placeholders`,
subagent_type: "qe-requirements-validator",
run_in_background: true
})
Spawn agents based on flags detected in Phase URL-2.
// IF HAS_UI === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD Accessibility Audit",
prompt: `You are qe-accessibility-auditor analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Perform WCAG 2.2 AA compliance assessment.
Identify accessibility barriers, missing ARIA, color contrast issues.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/07-accessibility-audit.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-accessibility-auditor",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_SECURITY === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD Security Threat Model",
prompt: `You are qe-security-auditor analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Apply STRIDE threat modeling framework.
Identify vulnerabilities, attack vectors, and mitigations.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/05-security-threat-model.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-security-auditor",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_UX === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD Quality Experience Analysis",
prompt: `You are qe-qx-partner analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Analyze user journeys, experience quality, friction points.
Map key user flows and identify UX risks.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/08-quality-experience.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-qx-partner",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_MIDDLEWARE === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD Middleware Integration Quality Criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-middleware-validator analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Assess middleware and integration bus quality criteria.
Identify message routing risks, transformation issues, and integration patterns.
Evaluate ESB, message broker, API gateway, and pub/sub quality concerns.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/09-middleware-quality.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-middleware-validator",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD SAP Integration Quality Criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-sap-rfc-tester analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Assess SAP-specific quality criteria including RFC, BAPI, IDoc, OData, and Fiori concerns.
Identify S/4HANA integration risks, CDS view dependencies, and ABAP quality issues.
Evaluate SAP interface stability, data consistency, and transport risks.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/10-sap-quality.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-sap-rfc-tester",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_AUTHORIZATION === TRUE
Task({
description: "QCSD Authorization Quality Criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-sod-analyzer analyzing ${URL}.
## WEBSITE CONTENT
${content}
## ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
Assess authorization and segregation of duties quality criteria.
Identify SoD conflicts, role misconfigurations, and access control matrix gaps.
Evaluate T-code restrictions, authorization object coverage, and GRC compliance risks.
## OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS (MANDATORY)
1. Write your complete analysis to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/11-authorization-quality.md
2. Use the Write tool to save BEFORE completing`,
subagent_type: "qe-sod-analyzer",
run_in_background: true
})
Before proceeding, verify agent count:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ AGENT COUNT VALIDATION │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ CORE AGENTS (ALWAYS 3): │
│ □ qe-quality-criteria-recommender - SPAWNED? [Y/N] │
│ □ qe-risk-assessor - SPAWNED? [Y/N] │
│ □ qe-requirements-validator - SPAWNED? [Y/N] │
│ │
│ CONDITIONAL AGENTS (based on flags): │
│ □ qe-accessibility-auditor - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_UI) │
│ □ qe-security-auditor - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_SECURITY) │
│ □ qe-qx-partner - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_UX) │
│ □ qe-middleware-validator - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_MIDDLEWARE)│
│ □ qe-sap-rfc-tester - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_SAP_INTEG) │
│ □ qe-sod-analyzer - SPAWNED? [Y/N] (HAS_AUTHORIZATION) │
│ │
│ VALIDATION: │
│ Expected agents: [3 + count of TRUE flags] │
│ Actual spawned: [count] │
│ Status: [PASS/FAIL] │
│ │
│ If ACTUAL < EXPECTED, you have FAILED. Spawn missing │
│ agents before proceeding. │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
❌ DO NOT proceed if validation FAILS.
After spawning, inform user and wait:
I've launched [N] agents in background:
- 📊 Quality Criteria Recommender: HTSM v6.3 analysis → 02-quality-criteria-analysis.md
- ⚠️ Risk Assessor: SFDIPOT analysis → 04-risk-assessment.md
- 🧪 Requirements Validator: Testability assessment → 03-testability-assessment.md
[IF HAS_UI]
- ♿ Accessibility Auditor: WCAG 2.2 audit → 07-accessibility-audit.md
[IF HAS_SECURITY]
- 🔒 Security Auditor: STRIDE threat model → 05-security-threat-model.md
[IF HAS_UX]
- 🎯 QX Partner: User experience analysis → 08-quality-experience.md
Each agent will write directly to: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/
Verify reports exist before synthesis:
ls -la "${OUTPUT_FOLDER}"
After agent reports are complete, invoke these skills:
// Testability Scoring - applies formal scoring methodology
Skill({ skill: "testability-scoring", args: `${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/03-testability-assessment.md` })
// Risk-Based Testing - prioritizes test selection
Skill({ skill: "risk-based-testing", args: `${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/04-risk-assessment.md` })
Required Skill Invocations:
| Skill | When | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
testability-scoring | After testability report | Formal 0-100 score calculation |
risk-based-testing | After risk report | Test prioritization matrix |
context-driven-testing | Always | Apply CDT principles to recommendations |
holistic-testing-pact | Always | Validate test strategy completeness |
❌ Analysis is INCOMPLETE without invoking related skills.
After all agents complete and skills are invoked:
${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/01-executive-summary.md${OUTPUT_FOLDER}/06-test-ideas.md## Recommended Follow-up Actions
| Action | Skill/Command | Reason |
|--------|---------------|--------|
| Generate Video Captions | `/a11y-ally ${URL}` | Video detected without captions - WCAG 1.2.2 compliance |
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory store \
--key "qcsd-${domain}-pattern" \
--value "[key learnings from this analysis]" \
--namespace patterns
IMPORTANT: If HAS_VIDEO=TRUE, the Executive Summary MUST include a "Recommended Follow-up Actions" section recommending /a11y-ally for video caption generation. This is NOT automatic - it's a recommendation for the user to run separately.
| Agent | Report Filename |
|---|---|
| qe-quality-criteria-recommender | 02-quality-criteria-analysis.md |
| qe-requirements-validator | 03-testability-assessment.md |
| qe-risk-assessor | 04-risk-assessment.md |
| qe-security-auditor | 05-security-threat-model.md |
| qe-accessibility-auditor | 07-accessibility-audit.md |
| qe-qx-partner | 08-quality-experience.md |
| Synthesis | 01-executive-summary.md |
| Synthesis | 06-test-ideas.md |
At the very end of swarm execution, ALWAYS output this completion summary:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ QCSD IDEATION SWARM COMPLETE │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ URL Analyzed: ${URL} │
│ Reports Generated: 8 │
│ Output Folder: ${OUTPUT_FOLDER} │
│ │
│ QUALITY SCORES: │
│ ├─ Risk Assessment: [score] │
│ ├─ Security Posture: [score] │
│ ├─ Quality Experience: [score] │
│ ├─ Testability: [score] │
│ └─ Accessibility: [score] │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
IF HAS_VIDEO=TRUE, ALSO output this prominent recommendation box:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ⚠️ FOLLOW-UP ACTION RECOMMENDED │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ VIDEO DETECTED WITHOUT CAPTIONS │
│ │
│ To generate WCAG 1.2.2 compliant captions, run: │
│ │
│ /a11y-ally ${URL} │
│ │
│ This will: │
│ • Download video and extract frames │
│ • Analyze each frame with Claude Vision │
│ • Generate captions.vtt and audiodesc.vtt │
│ • Save to docs/accessibility-scans/{page-slug}/ │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
❌ DO NOT end the swarm without displaying the completion summary. ❌ DO NOT skip the follow-up recommendation box if HAS_VIDEO=TRUE.
This swarm operates across 3 primary domains and 3 conditional domains:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ QCSD IDEATION - DOMAIN MAP │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ PRIMARY DOMAINS (Always Active) │
│ ┌─────────────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ requirements-validation │ │ coverage-analysis │ │
│ │ ─────────────────────── │ │ ───────────────────── │ │
│ │ • qe-quality-criteria- │ │ • qe-risk-assessor │ │
│ │ recommender (PRIMARY) │ │ │ │
│ │ • qe-requirements- │ │ │ │
│ │ validator │ │ │ │
│ └─────────────────────────┘ └─────────────────────────┘ │
│ │
│ CONDITIONAL DOMAINS (Based on Epic Content) │
│ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ ┌─────────────────┐ │
│ │security-complnce│ │visual-a11y │ │ cross-domain │ │
│ │─────────────────│ │─────────────────│ │─────────────────│ │
│ │qe-security- │ │qe-accessibility-│ │ qe-qx-partner │ │
│ │auditor │ │auditor │ │ │ │
│ │[IF HAS_SECURITY]│ │[IF HAS_UI] │ │[IF HAS_UX] │ │
│ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ └─────────────────┘ │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
This skill supports 3 execution models. Choose based on your environment:
| Model | When to Use | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Task Tool (PRIMARY) | Claude Code sessions | Full agent capabilities, parallel execution | Requires Claude Code |
| MCP Tools | MCP server available | Fleet coordination, memory persistence | Requires MCP setup |
| CLI | Terminal/scripts | Works anywhere, scriptable | Sequential only |
Option A: Task Tool (RECOMMENDED)
Just follow the skill phases below - uses Task() calls with run_in_background: true
Option B: MCP Tools
// Initialize fleet for Ideation domains
aqe fleet init --json
// Orchestrate ideation task
aqe task submit --json
Option C: CLI
# Initialize coordination
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest swarm init --topology hierarchical --max-agents 6
# Route task
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest hooks pre-task --description "QCSD Ideation for [Epic]"
# Execute agents
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn --type qe-quality-criteria-recommender
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn --type qe-risk-assessor
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn --type qe-requirements-validator
These rules are NON-NEGOTIABLE. Violation means skill execution failure.
| Rule | Enforcement |
|---|---|
| E1 | You MUST spawn ALL THREE core agents in Phase 2. No exceptions. |
| E2 | You MUST put all parallel Task calls in a SINGLE message. |
| E3 | You MUST STOP and WAIT after each batch. No proceeding early. |
| E4 | You MUST spawn conditional agents if flags are TRUE. No skipping. |
| E5 | You MUST apply GO/CONDITIONAL/NO-GO logic exactly as specified. |
| E6 | You MUST generate the full report structure. No abbreviated versions. |
| E7 | Each agent MUST read its reference files before analysis. |
❌ PROHIBITED BEHAVIORS:
⚠️ MANDATORY: You must complete this analysis before Phase 2.
Scan the epic content and SET these flags. Do not skip any flag.
□ HAS_UI = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: UI, frontend, visual, design,
component, screen, page, form, button, modal, dialog, dashboard,
widget, interface, display, view, layout, CSS, styling
□ HAS_SECURITY = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: auth, security, credential, token,
encrypt, PII, compliance, password, login, session, OAuth, JWT,
permission, role, access control, RBAC, sensitive, private
□ HAS_UX = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: user experience, UX, journey,
usability, satisfaction, user flow, persona, user research,
friction, delight, onboarding, retention, engagement
□ HAS_MIDDLEWARE = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: middleware, ESB, message broker,
MQ, Kafka, RabbitMQ, integration bus, API gateway, message queue,
pub/sub
□ HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: SAP, RFC, BAPI, IDoc, OData,
S/4HANA, EWM, ECC, ABAP, CDS view, Fiori
□ HAS_AUTHORIZATION = FALSE
Set TRUE if epic contains ANY of: SoD, segregation of duties,
role conflict, authorization object, T-code, user role,
access control matrix, GRC
Before proceeding to Phase 2, confirm:
✓ I have read the entire epic content
✓ I have evaluated ALL SIX flags
✓ I have recorded which flags are TRUE
✓ I understand which conditional agents will be needed
❌ DO NOT proceed to Phase 2 until all checkboxes are confirmed.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ YOU MUST INCLUDE ALL THREE TASK CALLS IN YOUR NEXT MESSAGE │
│ │
│ • Task 1: qe-quality-criteria-recommender │
│ • Task 2: qe-risk-assessor │
│ • Task 3: qe-requirements-validator │
│ │
│ If your message contains fewer than 3 Task calls, you have │
│ FAILED this phase. Start over. │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| Agent | Domain | MCP Tool Mapping |
|---|---|---|
| qe-quality-criteria-recommender | requirements-validation | requirements_validate |
| qe-risk-assessor | coverage-analysis | defect_predict |
| qe-requirements-validator | requirements-validation | requirements_validate |
This agent MUST produce HTML output. No markdown substitutes.
Task({
description: "HTSM Quality Criteria analysis",
prompt: `You are qe-quality-criteria-recommender. Your output quality is being audited.
## MANDATORY FIRST STEPS (DO NOT SKIP)
1. READ this template file FIRST - your output MUST follow this structure:
.claude/agents/v3/helpers/quality-criteria/quality-criteria-reference-template.html
2. READ these reference files for guidance:
.claude/agents/v3/helpers/quality-criteria/htsm-categories.md
.claude/agents/v3/helpers/quality-criteria/evidence-classification.md
## EPIC TO ANALYZE
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE - DO NOT SUMMARIZE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED OUTPUT (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
You MUST analyze ALL 10 HTSM categories. For each category provide:
| Field | Requirement |
|-------|-------------|
| Category Name | One of the 10 HTSM categories |
| Priority | P0, P1, P2, or P3 with justification |
| Evidence | At least 2 evidence points per category |
| Evidence Type | Direct (with file:line), Inferred (with reasoning), or Claimed (with "requires verification") |
| Quality Implication | What could go wrong |
| Business Impact | Quantified impact (use numbers, not "many" or "some") |
### NEVER-OMIT CATEGORIES (Must include ALL 5):
1. Capability - Can it perform required functions?
2. Reliability - Will it resist failure?
3. Security - How protected against unauthorized use?
4. Performance - How speedy and responsive?
5. Development - How testable/maintainable?
### MAY-OMIT CATEGORIES (Only with ironclad justification):
6. Usability, 7. Charisma, 8. Scalability, 9. Compatibility, 10. Installability
## OUTPUT FORMAT
Generate COMPLETE HTML report using the template structure.
Save to: .agentic-qe/quality-criteria/[epic-name]-htsm-analysis.html
## VALIDATION BEFORE SUBMITTING
✓ Did I read the template file?
✓ Did I analyze all 10 categories (or justify omissions)?
✓ Does every evidence point have proper classification?
✓ Are business impacts quantified with numbers?
✓ Is output in HTML format using template structure?`,
subagent_type: "qe-quality-criteria-recommender",
run_in_background: true
})
This agent MUST identify at least 5 risks. Fewer is a failure.
Task({
description: "Risk Storming analysis",
prompt: `You are qe-risk-assessor. Your output quality is being audited.
## METHODOLOGY
Apply risk-based-testing methodology systematically.
## EPIC TO ANALYZE
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE - DO NOT SUMMARIZE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED OUTPUT (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### Risk Identification Requirements
You MUST identify risks in ALL FOUR categories:
1. **Technical Risks** - Architecture, integration, dependencies, complexity
2. **Business Risks** - Revenue impact, user impact, compliance, reputation
3. **Quality Risks** - Testability, maintainability, reliability concerns
4. **Integration Risks** - Third-party services, APIs, data flows
**MINIMUM: 5 total risks. Target: 10+ risks.**
### For EACH Risk, Provide:
| Field | Requirement |
|-------|-------------|
| Risk ID | R001, R002, etc. |
| Description | Specific, actionable description (not vague) |
| Category | Technical, Business, Quality, or Integration |
| Likelihood | 1-5 scale with justification |
| Impact | 1-5 scale with justification |
| Risk Score | Likelihood × Impact |
| Mitigation | Specific mitigation strategy |
| Owner | Suggested owner (Dev, QE, Product, Ops) |
### Critical Risk Threshold
- Score ≥ 15 = CRITICAL (must be flagged prominently)
- Score 10-14 = HIGH
- Score 5-9 = MEDIUM
- Score < 5 = LOW
## OUTPUT FORMAT
Markdown with:
1. Executive Summary (top 3 risks in bold)
2. Risk Matrix Table (sorted by score descending)
3. Critical Risks Section (if any score ≥ 15)
4. Mitigation Priority List
## VALIDATION BEFORE SUBMITTING
✓ Did I identify at least 5 risks?
✓ Did I cover all 4 risk categories?
✓ Does every risk have likelihood, impact, AND score?
✓ Are critical risks (≥15) clearly flagged?
✓ Does every risk have a specific mitigation?`,
subagent_type: "qe-risk-assessor",
run_in_background: true
})
This agent MUST provide testability score 0-100. No ranges.
Task({
description: "AC validation and testability scoring",
prompt: `You are qe-requirements-validator. Your output quality is being audited.
## METHODOLOGY
Apply context-driven-testing and testability-scoring principles.
## ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA TO VALIDATE
=== ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA HERE - DO NOT SUMMARIZE]
=== ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA END ===
## REQUIRED OUTPUT (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. Testability Score (MANDATORY - SINGLE NUMBER)
Score each of the 10 testability principles (0-10 each):
| Principle | Score | Evidence |
|-----------|-------|----------|
| Controllability | X/10 | Can we control inputs/state? |
| Observability | X/10 | Can we observe outputs/behavior? |
| Isolability | X/10 | Can we test in isolation? |
| Separation of Concerns | X/10 | Are responsibilities clear? |
| Understandability | X/10 | Is behavior clearly specified? |
| Automatability | X/10 | Can tests be automated? |
| Heterogeneity | X/10 | Works across environments? |
| Simplicity | X/10 | Is complexity manageable? |
| Stability | X/10 | Are requirements stable? |
| Information Availability | X/10 | Do we have needed info? |
**TOTAL TESTABILITY SCORE: XX/100**
### 2. AC Completeness Assessment
For EACH acceptance criterion:
| AC ID | Text | INVEST Score | Issues | Testable? |
|-------|------|--------------|--------|-----------|
| AC1 | ... | X/6 | ... | Yes/No |
INVEST Criteria:
- **I**ndependent (can be tested alone)
- **N**egotiable (not over-specified)
- **V**aluable (delivers value)
- **E**stimable (can estimate effort)
- **S**mall (testable in one session)
- **T**estable (clear pass/fail)
**AC COMPLETENESS: XX%** (ACs that are fully testable / total ACs)
### 3. Gaps Identified (MANDATORY)
List ALL gaps found:
- Missing scenarios
- Unclear requirements
- Untestable criteria
- Ambiguous language
- Missing edge cases
**MINIMUM: Identify at least 3 gaps or explicitly state "No gaps found after thorough analysis"**
### 4. Recommendations
Specific, actionable recommendations to improve testability.
## VALIDATION BEFORE SUBMITTING
✓ Did I score all 10 testability principles?
✓ Did I calculate a single testability score (not a range)?
✓ Did I assess every AC against INVEST?
✓ Did I calculate AC completeness percentage?
✓ Did I identify gaps (or explicitly confirm none)?`,
subagent_type: "qe-requirements-validator",
run_in_background: true
})
If using MCP instead of Task tool:
// Option 1: Orchestrate via Queen Coordinator
aqe fleet init --json
// Submit tasks to specific domains
aqe task submit \
"quality-criteria-analysis" \
--priority "p0" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
aqe task submit \
"risk-assessment" \
--priority "p0" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
aqe task submit \
"requirements-validation" \
--priority "p0" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
// Check task status
aqe task list --json
If using CLI instead of Task tool:
# Initialize swarm for ideation
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest swarm init \
--topology hierarchical \
--max-agents 6 \
--strategy specialized
# Pre-task hook for routing
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest hooks pre-task \
--description "QCSD Ideation: Quality Criteria, Risk Assessment, AC Validation"
# Spawn agents (run in separate terminals or background)
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-quality-criteria-recommender \
--task "Analyze HTSM categories for epic" &
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-risk-assessor \
--task "Risk storming analysis" &
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-requirements-validator \
--task "AC validation and testability scoring" &
# Wait for completion
wait
# Check swarm status
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest swarm status
After sending all three Task calls, you MUST tell the user:
I've launched 3 core agents in parallel:
🎯 qe-quality-criteria-recommender [Domain: requirements-validation]
- Analyzing all 10 HTSM v6.3 categories
- Collecting evidence with classifications
- Generating HTML report
⚠️ qe-risk-assessor [Domain: coverage-analysis]
- Identifying Technical, Business, Quality, Integration risks
- Scoring likelihood × impact
- Prioritizing mitigations
✅ qe-requirements-validator [Domain: requirements-validation]
- Scoring testability (10 principles)
- Validating ACs against INVEST
- Identifying gaps
⏳ WAITING for all agents to complete before proceeding...
❌ DO NOT proceed to Phase 3 until you have sent this confirmation.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ YOU MUST WAIT FOR ALL THREE BACKGROUND TASKS TO COMPLETE │
│ │
│ ❌ DO NOT summarize what agents "would" find │
│ ❌ DO NOT proceed to Phase 4 early │
│ ❌ DO NOT provide your own analysis as substitute │
│ │
│ ✓ WAIT for actual agent results │
│ ✓ ONLY proceed when all three have returned │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
When results return, extract and record:
From qe-quality-criteria-recommender:
□ htsmCoverage = __/10 categories analyzed
□ p0Count = __ P0 priority items
□ evidenceQuality = Direct __%, Inferred __%, Claimed __%
From qe-risk-assessor:
□ totalRisks = __ risks identified
□ criticalRisks = __ risks with score ≥ 15
□ topRiskScore = __ (highest score)
From qe-requirements-validator:
□ testabilityScore = __/100
□ acCompleteness = __%
□ gapsIdentified = __ gaps
❌ DO NOT proceed to Phase 4 until ALL fields are filled.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ IF A FLAG IS TRUE, YOU MUST SPAWN THAT AGENT │
│ │
│ HAS_UI = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-accessibility-auditor │
│ HAS_SECURITY = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-security-auditor │
│ HAS_UX = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-qx-partner │
│ HAS_MIDDLEWARE = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-middleware-validator │
│ HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-sap-rfc-tester │
│ HAS_AUTHORIZATION = TRUE → MUST spawn qe-sod-analyzer │
│ │
│ Skipping a flagged agent is a FAILURE of this skill. │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| Flag | Agent | Domain | MCP Tool |
|---|---|---|---|
| HAS_UI | qe-accessibility-auditor | visual-accessibility | accessibility_test |
| HAS_SECURITY | qe-security-auditor | security-compliance | security_scan_comprehensive |
| HAS_UX | qe-qx-partner | cross-domain | task_orchestrate |
| HAS_MIDDLEWARE | qe-middleware-validator | enterprise-integration | task_orchestrate |
| HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION | qe-sap-rfc-tester | enterprise-integration | task_orchestrate |
| HAS_AUTHORIZATION | qe-sod-analyzer | enterprise-integration | task_orchestrate |
IF HAS_UI == FALSE AND HAS_SECURITY == FALSE AND HAS_UX == FALSE AND HAS_MIDDLEWARE == FALSE AND HAS_SAP_INTEGRATION == FALSE AND HAS_AUTHORIZATION == FALSE:
→ Skip to Phase 5 (no conditional agents needed)
→ State: "No conditional agents needed based on epic analysis"
ELSE:
→ Spawn ALL applicable agents in ONE message
→ Count how many you're spawning: __
Task({
description: "Early accessibility review",
prompt: `You are qe-accessibility-auditor. Your output quality is being audited.
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. UI Components Inventory
List EVERY UI component mentioned or implied:
| Component | Type | A11y Risk Level |
|-----------|------|-----------------|
### 2. WCAG 2.1 AA Risk Assessment
For each component, assess against:
- Perceivable (text alternatives, captions, adaptable, distinguishable)
- Operable (keyboard, timing, seizures, navigation)
- Understandable (readable, predictable, input assistance)
- Robust (compatible with assistive tech)
### 3. Keyboard Navigation Requirements
List ALL interactions that MUST support keyboard:
- [ ] Requirement 1
- [ ] Requirement 2
- ...
### 4. Screen Reader Considerations
What must be announced? What ARIA roles needed?
### 5. Findings Summary
| Finding | Severity | WCAG Criterion | Recommendation |
|---------|----------|----------------|----------------|
Severity: Critical (blocker), Major (significant barrier), Minor (inconvenience)
**MINIMUM: 3 findings or explicit "No accessibility risks identified after thorough analysis"**`,
subagent_type: "qe-accessibility-auditor",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
description: "Security threat modeling",
prompt: `You are qe-security-auditor. Your output quality is being audited.
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. STRIDE Threat Model
Analyze against ALL SIX categories:
| Threat Type | Applicable? | Threats Identified | Mitigations |
|-------------|-------------|-------------------|-------------|
| **S**poofing | Yes/No | ... | ... |
| **T**ampering | Yes/No | ... | ... |
| **R**epudiation | Yes/No | ... | ... |
| **I**nformation Disclosure | Yes/No | ... | ... |
| **D**enial of Service | Yes/No | ... | ... |
| **E**levation of Privilege | Yes/No | ... | ... |
### 2. Authentication/Authorization Requirements
- Auth method required: ___
- Session management: ___
- Permission model: ___
### 3. Data Protection Concerns
| Data Type | Classification | Protection Required |
|-----------|---------------|---------------------|
| ... | PII/Sensitive/Public | Encryption/Masking/None |
### 4. Compliance Implications
Check ALL that apply:
- [ ] GDPR (EU user data)
- [ ] CCPA (California user data)
- [ ] SOC 2 (security controls)
- [ ] HIPAA (health data)
- [ ] PCI-DSS (payment data)
- [ ] Other: ___
### 5. Security Testing Requirements
What security tests MUST be performed?
**MINIMUM: Identify threats in at least 3 STRIDE categories**`,
subagent_type: "qe-security-auditor",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
description: "Quality Experience analysis",
prompt: `You are qe-qx-partner. Your output quality is being audited.
## METHODOLOGY
Apply holistic-testing-pact methodology (PACTS principles).
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. Quality Experience Analysis (People, Activities, Contexts, Technologies)
| Dimension | Analysis |
|-----------|----------|
| **P**eople | Who are the users? Personas? Needs? |
| **A**ctivities | What are they trying to do? Goals? |
| **C**ontexts | Where/when/how do they use this? |
| **T**echnologies | What tech constraints exist? |
### 2. User Personas Affected
| Persona | Impact Level | Key Concerns |
|---------|--------------|--------------|
| ... | High/Medium/Low | ... |
### 3. User Journey Impact
Map affected touchpoints:
[Entry] → [Step 1] → [Step 2] → [Exit] ↑ Impact ↑ Impact
### 4. Quality Experience Risks
| QX Risk | User Feeling | Business Impact |
|---------|--------------|-----------------|
| ... | Frustrated/Confused/Delighted | ... |
### 5. UX Testing Recommendations
What UX-specific tests are needed?
- Usability testing needs
- User research gaps
- A/B testing candidates
**MINIMUM: Identify 3 QX risks or explicit "No QX risks after thorough analysis"**`,
subagent_type: "qe-qx-partner",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
description: "Middleware integration quality criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-middleware-validator. Your output quality is being audited.
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. Middleware Component Inventory
List EVERY middleware/integration component mentioned or implied:
| Component | Type | Quality Risk Level |
|-----------|------|-------------------|
### 2. Message Flow Quality Assessment
For each integration flow:
- Message routing reliability
- Transformation accuracy
- Dead letter queue handling
- Protocol mediation risks
- Retry and idempotency concerns
### 3. Integration Pattern Risks
| Pattern | Risk | Impact | Recommendation |
|---------|------|--------|----------------|
### 4. Quality Criteria Recommendations
What middleware-specific quality criteria MUST be validated?
**MINIMUM: 3 findings or explicit "No middleware quality risks after thorough analysis"**`,
subagent_type: "qe-middleware-validator",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
description: "SAP-specific quality criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-sap-rfc-tester. Your output quality is being audited.
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. SAP Interface Inventory
List EVERY SAP interface mentioned or implied:
| Interface | Type (RFC/BAPI/IDoc/OData) | Direction | Quality Risk |
|-----------|---------------------------|-----------|-------------|
### 2. SAP-Specific Quality Criteria
Assess quality concerns for:
- RFC/BAPI call reliability and error handling
- IDoc processing and status monitoring
- OData service contract stability
- S/4HANA migration compatibility
- CDS view dependencies and performance
- Fiori UI quality concerns (if applicable)
### 3. SAP Transport and Data Consistency
| Concern | Risk | Impact | Recommendation |
|---------|------|--------|----------------|
### 4. Quality Criteria Recommendations
What SAP-specific quality criteria MUST be validated?
**MINIMUM: 3 findings or explicit "No SAP quality risks after thorough analysis"**`,
subagent_type: "qe-sap-rfc-tester",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
description: "Authorization and SoD quality criteria",
prompt: `You are qe-sod-analyzer. Your output quality is being audited.
## EPIC CONTENT
=== EPIC CONTENT START ===
[PASTE THE COMPLETE EPIC CONTENT HERE]
=== EPIC CONTENT END ===
## REQUIRED ANALYSIS (ALL SECTIONS MANDATORY)
### 1. Authorization Scope Inventory
List EVERY authorization concern mentioned or implied:
| Concern | Type | Risk Level |
|---------|------|-----------|
### 2. Segregation of Duties Assessment
For each SoD concern:
- Role conflict identification
- Authorization object coverage
- T-code restriction analysis
- Access control matrix completeness
- GRC compliance requirements
### 3. Authorization Risk Matrix
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|------------|--------|------------|
### 4. Quality Criteria Recommendations
What authorization-specific quality criteria MUST be validated?
**MINIMUM: 3 findings or explicit "No authorization quality risks after thorough analysis"**`,
subagent_type: "qe-sod-analyzer",
run_in_background: true
})
// IF HAS_UI - Enable visual-accessibility domain
if (HAS_UI) {
aqe test accessibility --json
}
// IF HAS_SECURITY - Enable security-compliance domain
if (HAS_SECURITY) {
aqe security --json
}
// IF HAS_UX - Cross-domain analysis
if (HAS_UX) {
aqe task submit --json
}
# IF HAS_UI
if [ "$HAS_UI" = "TRUE" ]; then
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-accessibility-auditor \
--task "WCAG 2.1 AA assessment" &
fi
# IF HAS_SECURITY
if [ "$HAS_SECURITY" = "TRUE" ]; then
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-security-auditor \
--task "STRIDE threat modeling" &
fi
# IF HAS_UX
if [ "$HAS_UX" = "TRUE" ]; then
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn \
--type qe-qx-partner \
--task "Quality experience analysis" &
fi
# Wait for conditional agents
wait
I've launched [N] conditional agent(s) in parallel:
[IF HAS_UI] ♿ qe-accessibility-auditor [Domain: visual-accessibility] - WCAG 2.1 AA assessment
[IF HAS_SECURITY] 🔒 qe-security-auditor [Domain: security-compliance] - STRIDE threat modeling
[IF HAS_UX] 💫 qe-qx-partner [Domain: cross-domain] - Quality experience analysis
⏳ WAITING for conditional agents to complete...
You MUST apply this logic EXACTLY. No interpretation.
STEP 1: Check NO-GO conditions (ANY triggers NO-GO)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
IF testabilityScore < 40 → NO-GO (reason: "Testability critically low")
IF htsmCoverage < 6 → NO-GO (reason: "Insufficient quality coverage")
IF acCompleteness < 50 → NO-GO (reason: "Acceptance criteria incomplete")
IF criticalRisks > 2 → NO-GO (reason: "Too many critical risks")
STEP 2: Check GO conditions (ALL required for GO)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
IF testabilityScore >= 80
AND htsmCoverage >= 8
AND acCompleteness >= 90
AND criticalRisks == 0 → GO
STEP 3: Default
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
ELSE → CONDITIONAL
METRICS:
- testabilityScore = __/100
- htsmCoverage = __/10
- acCompleteness = __%
- criticalRisks = __
NO-GO CHECK:
- testabilityScore < 40? __ (YES/NO)
- htsmCoverage < 6? __ (YES/NO)
- acCompleteness < 50? __ (YES/NO)
- criticalRisks > 2? __ (YES/NO)
GO CHECK (only if no NO-GO triggered):
- testabilityScore >= 80? __ (YES/NO)
- htsmCoverage >= 8? __ (YES/NO)
- acCompleteness >= 90? __ (YES/NO)
- criticalRisks == 0? __ (YES/NO)
FINAL RECOMMENDATION: [GO / CONDITIONAL / NO-GO]
REASON: ___
ALL sections below are MANDATORY. No abbreviations.
# QCSD Ideation Report: [Epic Name]
**Generated**: [Date/Time]
**Recommendation**: [GO / CONDITIONAL / NO-GO]
**Agents Executed**: [List all agents that ran]
---
## Executive Summary
| Metric | Value | Threshold | Status |
|--------|-------|-----------|--------|
| HTSM Coverage | X/10 | ≥8 | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Testability Score | X% | ≥80% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| AC Completeness | X% | ≥90% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Critical Risks | X | 0 | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
**Recommendation Rationale**: [1-2 sentences explaining why GO/CONDITIONAL/NO-GO]
---
## Quality Criteria Analysis (HTSM v6.3)
[EMBED or LINK the HTML report from qe-quality-criteria-recommender]
### Priority Items Summary
| Priority | Count | Categories |
|----------|-------|------------|
| P0 (Critical) | X | [list] |
| P1 (High) | X | [list] |
| P2 (Medium) | X | [list] |
| P3 (Low) | X | [list] |
### Cross-Cutting Concerns
[List any concerns that span multiple categories]
---
## Risk Assessment
### Risk Matrix
| ID | Risk | Category | L | I | Score | Mitigation |
|----|------|----------|---|---|-------|------------|
[ALL risks from qe-risk-assessor, sorted by score]
### Critical Risks (Score ≥ 15)
[Highlight critical risks with detailed mitigation plans]
### Risk Distribution
- Technical: X risks
- Business: X risks
- Quality: X risks
- Integration: X risks
---
## Requirements Validation
### Testability Score: X/100
| Principle | Score | Notes |
|-----------|-------|-------|
[All 10 principles from qe-requirements-validator]
### AC Completeness: X%
| AC | Status | Issues |
|----|--------|--------|
[All ACs evaluated]
### Gaps Identified
1. [Gap 1]
2. [Gap 2]
[All gaps from qe-requirements-validator]
---
## Conditional Analysis
[INCLUDE ONLY IF APPLICABLE - based on which conditional agents ran]
### Accessibility Review (IF HAS_UI)
[Full output from qe-accessibility-auditor]
### Security Assessment (IF HAS_SECURITY)
[Full output from qe-security-auditor]
### Quality Experience (IF HAS_UX)
[Full output from qe-qx-partner]
---
## Recommended Next Steps
### Immediate Actions (Before Development)
- [ ] [Action based on findings]
- [ ] [Action based on findings]
### During Development
- [ ] [Action based on findings]
### Pre-Release
- [ ] [Action based on findings]
---
## Appendix: Agent Outputs
[Link to or embed full outputs from each agent]
---
*Generated by QCSD Ideation Swarm v6.1*
*Execution Model: Task Tool Parallel Swarm*
Before presenting report:
✓ Executive Summary table is complete with all 4 metrics
✓ Recommendation matches decision logic output
✓ Quality Criteria section includes priority summary
✓ Risk Matrix includes ALL identified risks
✓ Testability score shows all 10 principles
✓ All gaps are listed
✓ Conditional sections included for all spawned agents
✓ Next steps are specific and actionable (not generic)
❌ DO NOT present an incomplete report.
Store ideation findings for:
// Store ideation findings
aqe memory store \
--namespace "qcsd-ideation" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
// Share learnings with learning coordinator for cross-domain patterns
aqe memory share --json
// Query previous ideation results for similar epics
aqe memory search --namespace "qcsd-ideation" --json
# Store ideation findings
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory store \
--key "qcsd-ideation-${EPIC_ID}" \
--value '{"recommendation":"GO","testabilityScore":85,"htsmCoverage":9}' \
--namespace qcsd-ideation
# Search for similar epics
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory search \
--query "ideation recommendation" \
--namespace qcsd-ideation
# List all ideation records
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory list \
--namespace qcsd-ideation
# Post-task hook for learning
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest hooks post-task \
--task-id "qcsd-ideation-${EPIC_ID}" \
--success true
If MCP/CLI not available, save to .agentic-qe/:
# Output directory structure
.agentic-qe/
├── quality-criteria/
│ └── [epic-name]-htsm-analysis.html
├── ideation-reports/
│ └── [epic-name]-ideation-report.md
└── learnings/
└── [epic-id]-ideation-metrics.json
| Phase | Must Do | Failure Condition |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Check ALL 3 flags | Missing flag evaluation |
| 2 | Spawn ALL 3 core agents in ONE message | Fewer than 3 Task calls |
| 3 | WAIT for completion | Proceeding before results |
| 4 | Spawn ALL flagged conditional agents | Skipping a TRUE flag |
| 5 | Apply EXACT decision logic | Wrong recommendation |
| 6 | Generate COMPLETE report | Missing sections |
| 7 | Store learnings (if MCP/CLI available) | Pattern loss |
| Metric | GO | CONDITIONAL | NO-GO |
|---|---|---|---|
| Testability | ≥80% | 40-79% | <40% |
| HTSM Coverage | ≥8/10 | 6-7/10 | <6/10 |
| AC Completeness | ≥90% | 50-89% | <50% |
| Critical Risks | 0 | 1-2 | >2 |
| Domain | Agent | Primary Phase |
|---|---|---|
| requirements-validation | qe-quality-criteria-recommender | Ideation (P) |
| requirements-validation | qe-requirements-validator | Ideation (P) |
| coverage-analysis | qe-risk-assessor | Ideation (P) |
| security-compliance | qe-security-auditor | Ideation (S - conditional) |
| visual-accessibility | qe-accessibility-auditor | Ideation (S - conditional) |
| cross-domain | qe-qx-partner | Ideation (S - conditional) |
| Model | Initialization | Agent Spawn | Memory Store |
|---|---|---|---|
| Task Tool | N/A | Task({ subagent_type, run_in_background: true }) | N/A (use MCP) |
| MCP Tools | fleet_init({}) | task_submit({}) | memory_store({}) |
| CLI | swarm init | agent spawn | memory store |
// Initialization
aqe fleet init --json
// Task submission
aqe task submit \
"..." \
--priority "p0" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
aqe task submit --json
// Status
aqe fleet status --json
aqe task list --json
// Memory
aqe memory store \
--key "..." \
--namespace "qcsd-ideation" \
--payload '{...}' \
--json
aqe memory search --namespace "qcsd-ideation" --json
aqe memory share --json
# Initialization
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest swarm init --topology hierarchical --max-agents 6
# Agent operations
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest agent spawn --type [agent-type] --task "[description]"
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest hooks pre-task --description "[task]"
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest hooks post-task --task-id "[id]" --success true
# Status
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest swarm status
# Memory
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory store --key "[key]" --value "[json]" --namespace qcsd-ideation
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory search --query "[query]" --namespace qcsd-ideation
npx @claude-flow/cli@latest memory list --namespace qcsd-ideation
QCSD IDEATION SWARM v7.0
│
┌───────────────┼───────────────┐
│ │ │
┌────▼────┐ ┌─────▼─────┐ ┌─────▼─────┐
│Quality │ │ Risk │ │ AC │
│Criteria │ │ Assessor │ │ Validator │
│ (HTML) │ │ │ │ │
│─────────│ │───────────│ │───────────│
│req-valid│ │cov-anlysis│ │req-valid │
└────┬────┘ └─────┬─────┘ └─────┬─────┘
│ │ │
└───────────────┼───────────────┘
│
[QUALITY GATE]
│
┌───────────────┼───────────────┐
│ │ │
┌────▼────┐ ┌─────▼─────┐ ┌─────▼─────┐
│ A11y │ │ Security │ │ QX │
│[IF UI] │ │[IF AUTH] │ │ [IF UX] │
│─────────│ │───────────│ │───────────│
│vis-a11y │ │sec-compli │ │cross-dom │
└─────────┘ └───────────┘ └───────────┘
| Resource Type | Count | Primary | Conditional |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agents | 9 | 3 | 6 |
| Sub-agents | 0 | - | - |
| Skills | 4 | 4 | - |
| Domains | 6 | 2 | 4 |
Skills Used:
testability-scoring - 10 testability principlesrisk-based-testing - Risk prioritizationcontext-driven-testing - Context-appropriate strategyholistic-testing-pact - PACTS methodology (Proactive, Autonomous, Collaborative, Targeted, Structured)Quality is built in from the start, not tested in at the end.
This swarm provides: