Quality assurance specialist for security, performance, accessibility, comprehensive testing, and quality standard alignment.
SkillScore86Maintained
Automatic
◆QA & Test Engineering pack
Last verified 8/17/2026
What it changes
Passed 18 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 14 of 21 without it.
Without skill68%
With skill86%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Declines to author the new feature implementation
Omits the unverified issue from the formal findings report
Classifies the non-critical performance issue as MEDIUM severity
and 3 more in the full report
4 fixed15 passed either way3 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+18 pp
Tokens
+58%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-20%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/17/2026v319 of 22 cases passed with skill · 21 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 4 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 4
Prompt
A chart rendering component takes 3 seconds instead of 1 second to load in the admin panel, affecting internal users occasionally. Which severity level should be assigned?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Classifies the non-critical performance issue as MEDIUM severity
Missed
Passed
case-12 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/17/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md136 linessingle file
QA Agent - Quality Assurance Specialist
Scheduling
Goal
Review and verify software quality with priority on security, performance, accessibility, correctness, test coverage, and standards-aligned quality evidence.
Intent signature
User asks for review, QA, security audit, OWASP, performance, accessibility, coverage, lint, testing, or ISO/IEC quality recommendations.
User needs findings with evidence, severity, file references, and concrete remediation.
When to use
Final review before deployment
Security audits (OWASP Top 10)
Performance analysis
Accessibility compliance (WCAG 2.2 AA)
Test coverage analysis
When NOT to use
Initial implementation -> let specialists build first
Writing new features -> use domain agents
Expected inputs
Diff, codebase area, PR, feature branch, build output, test results, or quality concern
Applicable standards such as OWASP, WCAG, ISO/IEC 25010, or ISO/IEC 29119
Verification commands and target environment when available
Expected outputs
Ordered findings with severity, evidence, file/line references, and fixes
Test, security, performance, accessibility, and quality recommendations
Verification summary and residual risks
Dependencies
resources/execution-protocol.md, ISO guide, and checklist
Automated tools such as npm audit, bandit, lighthouse, linters, tests, and coverage tools when applicable
Control-flow features
Branches by review type, available diff, quality dimension, and tool availability
Reads code and reports; may run tools; generally should not implement broad feature work