fomo-qa

fomo-qa

This makes "prepare a clean, consistent fomo-kernel dogfood environment" a procedure. It is a QA tool for development and maintenance, answering "I changed the engine — walking through as a real user would, is the experience right?", and it guarantees every run tests the same thing: the latest origin/main.

This is the mandatory standard path for every fomo-kernel dogfood (v1, fixed 2026-07-20) — every dogfood starts here. Do not improvise an environment on the spot.

Cross-client contract source (since 2026-07-21): docs/qa-runbook.md in the kol_collector/fomo-kernel repository (PR #275) defines what counts as a compliant QA run — seven gates (version gate / isolated root / receipt throughout / verdict+verify / archived manifest / privacy lint / findings disposition). A session missing any of them is not a QA run and its conclusions may not be cited. The seventh was added on 2026-07-27 (#417): a session passing the first six while leaving behind no replayable asset is exactly what this loop actually looked like for a year. That docs/qa-runbook.md, together with the repo-root AGENTS.md, must stay independent of this skill and of any personal registry — fomo-kernel is a public product a stranger clones on any machine, and cannot assume they have this skill. When the two disagree, the runbook wins.

What this skill is: the runbook's seven gates automated into a repeatable procedure plus the qa_env.sh tool, for ting's own maintenance of fomo-kernel. Since 2026-07-21 it is reachable through ai-harness's discovery registry, so Claude, Codex and Antigravity all call the same canonical content under the same name fomo-qa (see ai-harness/inventory/fomo-qa.json). It is not for anyone else — an external user has no such skill and needs none; they follow the public docs/qa-runbook.md above.

Why it exists: a 2026-07-19 audit found 17 of 18 worktrees behind main (the worst by 28 commits). Dogfood had been running on development worktrees each pinned to its own base — testing some past slice of the product, with no way to learn afterwards which slice. "It runs" is not "it tested the latest version". This skill blocks that mechanically (issue #250).

Its place in the eval system: this is also the execution procedure that docs/eval-design.md's evidence level 4 (human review) and observation surface 1 (content-free interaction receipts) had always lacked. A walkthrough ends by producing a ux_receipt owner verdict, turning the layer eval currently marks "pending owner dogfood" into a machine-readable annotation that accumulates. Since 2026-07-27 it produces one more thing: step 6 converts every miss into a replayable episode under evals/episodes/, so a dogfood produces a permanent regression asset rather than a one-off observation — that is what "what we get is stable enough to keep" means.