agent-team/skills/qa-checklist/SKILL.md
Bryan Ramos 341f500396 feat: add typed inter-agent communication schema
Replace freetext signals (RFR, LGTM, VERDICT: PASS) with YAML
frontmatter envelopes routed by a `signal` field. New message-schema
skill defines 12 message types covering worker submissions, review/audit
verdicts, triage/plan results, research results, and orchestrator
commands. All agents load the skill; qa-checklist enforces compliance;
orchestrate routes by envelope signal.
2026-04-02 07:38:02 -04:00

2.7 KiB

name description
qa-checklist Self-validation checklist. All workers run this against their own output before returning results.

Self-QA checklist

Before returning your output, validate against every item below. If you find a violation, fix it — don't just note it.

Factual accuracy

  • Every file path, function name, class name, and line number you reference — does it actually exist? Verify with Read/Grep if uncertain. Never guess paths or signatures.
  • Every version number, API endpoint, or external reference — is it correct? If you can't verify, say "unverified" explicitly.
  • No invented specifics. If you don't know something, say so.

Logic and correctness

  • Do your conclusions follow from the evidence? Trace the reasoning.
  • Are there internal contradictions in your output?
  • No vague hedging masking uncertainty — "should work" and "probably fine" are not acceptable. Be precise about what you know and don't know.

Scope and completeness

  • Re-read the acceptance criteria. Check each one explicitly. Did you address all of them?
  • Did you solve the right problem? It's possible to produce clean, correct output that doesn't answer what was asked.
  • Are there required parts missing?

Security and correctness risks (code output)

  • No unsanitized external input at system boundaries
  • No hardcoded secrets or credentials
  • No command injection, path traversal, or SQL injection vectors
  • Error handling present where failures are possible
  • No silent failure — errors propagate or are logged

Code quality (code output)

  • Matches the project's existing patterns and style
  • No unrequested additions, refactors, or "improvements"
  • No duplicated logic that could use an existing helper
  • Names are descriptive, no magic numbers

Claims and assertions

  • If you stated something as fact, can you back it up? Challenge your own claims.
  • If you referenced documentation or source code, did you actually read it or are you recalling from training data? When it matters, verify.

Schema compliance

  • Does your output start with a valid YAML frontmatter envelope (--- delimiters)?
  • Does the type field match your message type?
  • Does the signal field use a valid enum value from the message-schema skill?
  • Are all required fields for your message type present?
  • Are hard rules satisfied (e.g., critical_count > 0 requires signal: fail)?

After validation

Set qa_check: pass or qa_check: fail in your frontmatter envelope. This replaces the old QA self-check prose line.

In your Self-Assessment section, include:

  • If qa_check is fail: what you found and fixed before submission
  • If anything remains unverifiable, flag it explicitly as Unverified: [claim]