test-evidence-review

Evaluate test coverage and evidence quality against acceptance criteria.

Updated Apr 25, 2026

Search Tags:#sign-off #quality-assurance #unit-tests #integration-tests #evidence-management #test-evidence-review

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/packetalien/cursor-game-studios --skill test-evidence-review-packetalien

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: test-evidence-review
Source: https://github.com/packetalien/cursor-game-studios/tree/main/.cursor/skills/test-evidence-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/packetalien/cursor-game-studios --skill test-evidence-review-packetalien

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Quality assurance often focuses on the existence of tests. This skill extends that focus to evaluate assertion coverage, edge case handling, naming conventions, and evidence completeness, producing a verdict per story to guide QA readiness.

Core Features & Use Cases

Analyzes story tests and evidence including unit/integration tests and QA documents.
Identifies gaps in coverage, edge-case handling, and sign-off requirements.
Generates per-story verdicts (ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, MISSING) and actionable recommendations.

Quick Start

Run the command /test-evidence-review [story-path] to review a single story's evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions about test-evidence-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I evaluate test coverage and evidence quality for QA sign-off?▼

To evaluate test coverage and QA sign-off readiness, you can analyze assertion coverage, edge case handling, and evidence completeness across stories to identify gaps in automated tests and documentation, producing actionable verdicts.

What is the best way to identify missing test evidence across a sprint?▼

Identifying missing test evidence across a sprint involves evaluating test artifacts and QA documents at scale to detect gaps in edge-case handling, assertion coverage, and sign-off requirements, generating per-story verdicts.

Can I review unit and integration test quality for a single user story?▼

Yes, you can review unit and integration test quality for a single story by analyzing its test artifacts and evidence documents to evaluate assertion coverage and naming conventions, producing an ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, or MISSING verdict.

Does evaluating test evidence check for edge case handling and naming conventions?▼

Evaluating test evidence extends beyond checking test existence to verify assertion coverage, edge case handling, and naming conventions, ensuring test artifacts meet acceptance criteria before generating a sign-off readiness verdict.

What do ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, and MISSING verdicts mean for test evidence review?▼

ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, and MISSING are per-story verdicts indicating whether test artifacts and evidence meet acceptance criteria, accompanied by a detailed findings report and actionable recommendations to resolve coverage gaps.

When do I need to review test evidence for quality assurance sign-off?▼

You need to review test evidence for quality assurance sign-off when evaluating whether test artifacts meet acceptance criteria, identifying gaps in automated tests and evidence documents before granting story, sprint, or system release approval.