Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add fishzjp/qa-skills --skill test-case-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fishzjp/qa-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/fishzjp/qa-skills/test-case-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fishzjp/qa-skills/test-case-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fishzjp/qa-skills/test-case-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fishzjp/qa-skills/test-case-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fishzjp/qa-skills/test-case-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00109 | $0.01767 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.00883 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00353 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00177 |
Grade A, and why
test-case-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
测试用例审查(test-case-review)
回答"这些测试用例到底测得好不好"——事后、独立的审查(写时自审归 test-case-writing 阶段四)。
- 输入:已有用例文件(markmap + Schema,若无可先行抽取)、PRD / 需求模型、代码仓库
- 输出(落盘):直接修订用例文件(修订后重新抽取 Schema)+ 审查记录(文件末尾附录)
- 审查记录内容:缺失 / 冗余 / 错误 / 高风险未覆盖,按 TC 编号列出
When to Use
- 审存量用例资产(祖传用例、他人编写)是否覆盖到位、能否执行
- 审 AI 产出的用例(覆盖 + 可执行性双线)
- 需要一份独立于编写者的审查结论(写时自审不能替代)
When NOT to Use
- 从零写用例 →
test-case-writing - 写用例过程中的自审 →
test-case-writing阶段四(4A/4B 两层审查) - 端到端流水线中的审查环节 → 由
qa调度本 skill,但单用户直接触发本 skill 同样适用 - 代码变更后的回归范围选择 →
regression-testing
工作流
1. 建立可测点基准(分母)
覆盖审查需要一个合法分母,按优先级取:
- 人工标注的可测点清单(存在时,最权威)
- 需求模型 + 与用户共同确认的可测点清单(审查开始前列出,请用户补漏确认)
- 仅有原始输入源 → 从 PRD/代码自行提炼可测点清单,**标注"未经确认"**并在交付时请用户复核
没有分母的覆盖率是给自己批改作业——基准缺失时如实说明,不编造覆盖率。
2. 覆盖审查(此时执行 ../core/coverage.md:核心 7 维逐项全检 + 横切可执行性)
- 核心七维度逐项:功能主流程 / 输入校验 / 逆向操作与生命周期 / 状态流转 / 数据一致性 / 文档隐含需求 / 代码审查发现(有代码时);扩展维度(8–19)按 coverage.md「维度选取速查」按项目类型选取,不做机械全检(执行强度按消费方分流,见其文件头)
- 状态流转维度复核时加载
../core/methods/state-machine.md:按其"状态集 × 事件集 × 转换边"清单逐边核对用例覆盖(每边至少一条 + 非法转换/并发竞态/逆向边三类必补),用例没按状态机组织时反向自行提取状态机再核对,防"看起来有覆盖" - 二阶交叉(
../core/testing-principles.md第 3 节):写入路径 × 校验规则、失败 × 重试、标识 × 重复——存量用例最常见的系统性缺口 - 对照基准逐点核记:已覆盖(TC 编号)/ 未覆盖 / 覆盖但断言错误 / 冗余(多条测同一点)/ 无效(测的不是本需求)
3. 可执行性审查(此时执行 ../core/executability.md 全部检查项)
逐条用例过八条硬标准,重点命中:
- 占位符数据(
{xxx}、"某数据")、虚构入口、模糊判定("功能正常")、异步无时限、断言超强度、前置不可得无 TODO、正文代码内部、缺导读四件套
4. 正确性审查(有 PRD/代码时)
- 用例预期结果与 PRD 规则 / 代码实现是否一致(静态裁决:代码为准,见
../core/evidence.md) - 优先级标注合理性(P0 逐条过自检:失败则核心不可用?);风险等级对齐
../core/risk-model.md(Critical 必有 P0)
5. 修订与落盘
- 直接在用例文件中修订:补缺失用例(追加 TC 编号)、删除冗余、改正错误断言、补可执行性要素(导读区/时限/入口路径/具体数据);新增与改写的用例同样执行
../core/case-format.md格式硬约束(四段式/协作五段式、TC 编号、正文零代码内部) - 修订后重新抽取 Schema(字段与转义规则见
../core/schema-extraction.md),并用../core/scripts/validate_schema.py复验通过后再落盘 - 文件末尾追加审查记录:
## 审查记录(test-case-review {日期})
- 基准:{人工标注 / 需求模型确认 / 自行提炼(未经确认)}
- 审查前:XX 条用例,XX 个模块
- 审查后:XX 条用例,XX 个模块
- 缺失(已补):TC-xx…({场景})
- 冗余(已删):TC-xx…
- 错误(已改):TC-xx…({问题→修正})
- 高风险未覆盖:{风险点 + 建议用例,无代码证据则标注}
- 可执行性修复:{占位符/时限/入口 等 XX 处}
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago Changed · +14 tokens per session 670978ba849b
- 6d ago Changed · +1 lines c0bf435130b4
- 10d ago First seen · 91 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A 2ed62dd30fdb
test-case-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository fishzjp/qa-skills (27 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 1,767 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
qa-expert
Expert-level quality assurance, testing strategies, automation, and QA processes. Use when the user mentions testing, test automation, quality assurance, or Selenium, or when the task involves Testing Types, QA Processes, Test Strategy, or Defect Management.
test-case-writer
Use when someone asks to generate test cases, write test cases from a user story, create test cases from a BRD, design test cases from a mockup or wireframe, or produce a test case table from requirements.
test-review
A review checklist for newly written or changed automated tests using TypeScript and Playwright. Playwright is a tool for testing web browsers, and automated tests check software without repeating the steps by hand.
playwright-expert
Expert in Playwright E2E testing framework, auto-waiting mechanisms, test generation, trace viewer, and CI/CD integration. Use when the user mentions testing, end-to-end tests, QA, automation, end-to-end testing, or test automation, or when the task involves Playwright Framework, Test Organization, Advanced Features…
selenium-expert
Expert in Selenium WebDriver, Selenium Grid, page object model, waits, cross-browser testing, and test automation frameworks. Use when the user mentions testing, end-to-end tests, QA, automation, WebDriver, or Selenium grid, or when the task involves Selenium Components, Browser Support, Advanced Features, or Basic…
testing
A thorough testing framework for websites, user interfaces, back-end services, APIs, and builds. It checks normal use, errors, limits, and unusual combinations, and records evidence for each result.