skills.rest
wsman
wsmanCOMMUNITY
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

test-evidence-review

Review test files and manual evidence for coverage gaps before QA sign-off.

18|5|Updated Nov 25, 2025
Search Tags:#qa#evidence#sign-off#coverage#test review#assertions
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/wsman/MY-DOGE-MICRO --skill test-evidence-review-wsman
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: test-evidence-review
Source: https://github.com/wsman/MY-DOGE-MICRO/tree/main/.agents/skills/test-evidence-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/wsman/MY-DOGE-MICRO --skill test-evidence-review-wsman

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps teams determine whether test files and manual evidence are strong enough to support QA sign-off, instead of only checking that files exist.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Reviews assertion coverage, edge cases, naming quality, and formula traceability for automated tests.
  • Checks manual evidence for criterion coverage, required sign-offs, screenshots, walkthroughs, and freshness.
  • Use it to audit a single story, an entire sprint, or a full system before release decisions.

Quick Start

Ask the test-evidence-review skill to evaluate the evidence for a story path, sprint, or system and return a clear ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, or MISSING verdict.

Frequently Asked Questions about test-evidence-review

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I check test coverage gaps before QA sign-off?▼

To ensure QA sign-off readiness, review test files and manual evidence documents to evaluate assertion coverage, edge-case handling, and criterion traceability, producing ADEQUATE, INCOMPLETE, or MISSING verdicts with documented issues.

What is manual evidence review for QA release decisions?▼

Manual evidence review for QA release decisions evaluates screenshots, walkthrough logs, and required sign-offs against acceptance criteria to verify proof of coverage and evidence freshness before approving a story or sprint.

How do I audit assertion coverage and edge cases for a whole sprint?▼

Audit assertion coverage and edge cases across a sprint by locating relevant story artifacts and evaluating automated test files and manual evidence quality to return documented issues and a clear coverage verdict.

Can I use test evidence review for game domain testing and system audits?▼

Yes, test evidence review supports game domain testing and full system audits by evaluating assertion coverage, formula traceability, and naming quality across single stories, sprints, or entire systems before release decisions.

What is the best way to verify test evidence quality instead of just checking files exist?▼

To verify test evidence quality beyond file existence, evaluate automated tests for assertion coverage and naming quality, and check manual evidence for required sign-offs, screenshots, and walkthrough freshness against acceptance criteria.

When should I expect an INCOMPLETE or MISSING verdict during test evidence review?▼

Expect an INCOMPLETE or MISSING verdict during test evidence review when automated tests lack edge-case handling or formula traceability, or when manual evidence lacks required sign-offs, screenshots, or walkthrough logs matching acceptance criteria.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
raiichraiich
1

doc-reviewer

Review Markdown files for naming, conciseness, consistency, and completeness.

Community
Basic
solace-illsolace-ill

test-evidence-review

Evaluate test evidence against acceptance criteria and produce per-story verdicts.

Community
Advanced
phrazzldphrazzld
13

pr-walkthrough

Capture screenshots, browser GIFs, and terminal output into a Pull Request body.

Community
Intermediate
mrigsbymrigsby

Code Coverage Testing

Analyze code coverage in CFML and BoxLang applications.

Community
Advanced