Verified:GitHub

test-evidence-review

Review automated test files and manual evidence documents for story closure verdicts.

Updated Apr 4, 2026

Search Tags:#acceptance criteria #automated testing #test evidence #release readiness #quality review #coverage heuristics #manual QA

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/WindXRan/y3td --skill test-evidence-review-windxran

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: test-evidence-review
Source: https://github.com/WindXRan/y3td/tree/main/.claude/skills/test-evidence-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/WindXRan/y3td --skill test-evidence-review-windxran

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

It prevents stories from being marked closed when tests only check for existence or when manual evidence is missing required sign-offs, edge-case coverage, or required artefacts.

Core Features & Use Cases

Automated test quality scoring: Evaluates assertion coverage, edge-case handling, test naming quality, and formula traceability for Logic/Integration stories.
Manual evidence completeness checks: Verifies acceptance-criteria linkage, required sign-offs (Developer/Designer/QA), screenshot/artefact presence, and evidence freshness for Visual/Feel and UI stories.
Actionable verdicts: Produces ADEQUATE / INCOMPLETE / MISSING per story and an overall sprint/system worst-case verdict suitable for QA sign-off.

Quick Start

Run the evidence review for a single story by asking an AI agent to execute the command /test-evidence-review <story-path>.

Frequently Asked Questions about test-evidence-review

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

FAQPage Schema

How do I verify automated test coverage and prevent low-quality story closures?▼

You verify automated test coverage by evaluating assertion quality, edge-case handling, and test naming conventions to prevent low-quality story closures. This process assesses whether tests genuinely validate logic or merely check for existence before allowing story sign-off.

What is test evidence review and how does it assess release readiness?▼

Test evidence review evaluates automated test files and manual evidence documents against acceptance criteria to assess release readiness. It assigns ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, or MISSING verdicts per story, generating an overall worst-case verdict suitable for QA sign-off.

How do I check manual QA evidence for missing sign-offs and acceptance criteria linkage?▼

You check manual QA evidence by validating required Developer, Designer, and QA sign-offs alongside acceptance-criteria linkage and screenshot presence. This ensures Visual, Feel, and UI stories meet completeness requirements before sprint closure.

Can I use coverage heuristics to evaluate test quality for integration and logic stories?▼

Yes, you can apply coverage heuristics to evaluate test quality for integration and logic stories. This involves assessing assertions, edge cases, naming conventions, and formula traceability to ensure comprehensive validation against defined acceptance criteria.

Does test evidence review work at sprint or system epic scope?▼

Yes, test evidence review works at single-story, sprint, and system epic scopes. It locates evidence using test globs and evidence paths, then aggregates individual story verdicts to produce an overall worst-case verdict for the entire system.

What are the limitations of relying on automated tests for release readiness?▼

Relying solely on automated tests risks unverified story closures when tests only check for existence. Limitations include missing manual evidence, absent required sign-offs, and incomplete edge-case coverage, necessitating a combined automated and manual evidence review.