菜单
Focus testing effort on highest-risk areas using risk assessment and prioritization. Use when planning test strategy, allocating testing resources, or making coverage decisions.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
基于 SOC 职业分类
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。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/proffesor-for-testing/sentinel-api-testing --skill risk-based-testing命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
WCAG 2.2 compliance testing, screen reader validation, and inclusive design verification. Use when ensuring legal compliance (ADA, Section 508), testing for disabilities, or building accessible applications for 1 billion disabled users globally.
AI agents as force multipliers for quality work. Core skill for all 19 QE agents using PACT principles.
Comprehensive API testing patterns including contract testing, REST/GraphQL testing, and integration testing. Use when testing APIs or designing API test strategies.
| name | risk-based-testing |
| description | Focus testing effort on highest-risk areas using risk assessment and prioritization. Use when planning test strategy, allocating testing resources, or making coverage decisions. |
| category | testing-methodologies |
| priority | high |
| tokenEstimate | 1000 |
| agents | ["qe-regression-risk-analyzer","qe-test-generator","qe-production-intelligence","qe-quality-gate"] |
| implementation_status | optimized |
| optimization_version | 1 |
| last_optimized | 2025-12-02T00:00:00.000Z |
| dependencies | [] |
| quick_reference_card | true |
| tags | ["risk","prioritization","test-planning","coverage","impact-analysis"] |
<default_to_action> When planning tests or allocating testing resources:
Quick Risk Assessment:
Critical Success Factors:
Risk Score = Probability (1-5) × Impact (1-5)
| Score | Priority | Effort | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20-25 | Critical | 60% | Comprehensive testing, multiple techniques |
| 12-19 | High | 25% | Thorough testing, automation priority |
| 6-11 | Medium | 10% | Standard testing, basic automation |
| 1-5 | Low | 5% | Smoke test, exploratory only |
| Factor | Low (1) | Medium (3) | High (5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complexity | Simple CRUD | Business logic | Algorithms, integrations |
| Change Rate | Stable 6+ months | Monthly changes | Weekly/daily changes |
| Developer Experience |
| Senior, domain expert |
| Mid-level |
| Junior, new to codebase |
| Technical Debt | Clean code | Some debt | Legacy, no tests |
| Factor | Low (1) | Medium (3) | High (5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Users Affected | Admin only | Department | All users |
| Revenue | None | Indirect | Direct (checkout) |
| Safety | Convenience | Data loss | Physical harm |
| Reputation | Internal | Industry | Public scandal |
Feature | Probability | Impact | Risk | Priority
--------|-------------|--------|------|----------
Checkout | 4 | 5 | 20 | Critical
User Auth | 3 | 5 | 15 | High
Admin Panel | 2 | 2 | 4 | Low
Search | 3 | 3 | 9 | Medium
await Task("Risk-Based Test Generation", {
critical: {
features: ['checkout', 'payment'],
depth: 'comprehensive',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration', 'e2e', 'performance', 'security']
},
high: {
features: ['auth', 'user-profile'],
depth: 'thorough',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration', 'e2e']
},
medium: {
features: ['search', 'notifications'],
depth: 'standard',
techniques: ['unit', 'integration']
},
low: {
features: ['admin-panel', 'settings'],
depth: 'smoke',
techniques: ['smoke-tests']
}
}, "qe-test-generator");
// Production incident increases risk
await Task("Update Risk Score", {
feature: 'search',
event: 'production-incident',
previousRisk: 9,
newProbability: 5, // Increased due to incident
newRisk: 15 // Now HIGH priority
}, "qe-regression-risk-analyzer");
// Agent predicts risk using historical data
const riskAnalysis = await Task("ML Risk Analysis", {
codeChanges: changedFiles,
historicalBugs: bugDatabase,
prediction: {
model: 'gradient-boosting',
factors: ['complexity', 'change-frequency', 'author-experience', 'file-age']
}
}, "qe-regression-risk-analyzer");
// Output: 95% accuracy risk prediction per file
aqe/risk-based/
├── risk-scores/* - Current risk assessments
├── historical-bugs/* - Bug patterns by area
├── production-data/* - Incident data for risk
└── coverage-map/* - Test depth by risk level
const riskFleet = await FleetManager.coordinate({
strategy: 'risk-based-testing',
agents: [
'qe-regression-risk-analyzer', // Risk scoring
'qe-test-generator', // Risk-appropriate tests
'qe-production-intelligence', // Production feedback
'qe-quality-gate' // Risk-based gates
],
topology: 'sequential'
});
# Risk-based test selection in pipeline
- name: Risk Analysis
run: aqe risk-analyze --changes ${{ github.event.pull_request.files }}
- name: Run Critical Tests
if: risk.critical > 0
run: npm run test:critical
- name: Run High Tests
if: risk.high > 0
run: npm run test:high
- name: Skip Low Risk
if: risk.low_only
run: npm run test:smoke
Risk = Probability × Impact. Test where bugs hurt most. Critical gets 60%, low gets 5%. Risk is dynamic - reassess with new info. Production incidents raise risk scores.
With Agents: Agents calculate risk using ML on historical data, select risk-appropriate tests, and adjust scores from production feedback. Use agents to maintain dynamic risk profiles at scale.