Interview

Skill akovalion/paranoid-qa/skills/interview

Claude Code skills that turn an AI agent into a meticulous QA engineer. Evidence or it didn't happen.

Install

npx -y skills add akovalion/paranoid-qa --skill interview

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

2 things to look at

28 days oldThe repository was created 28 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
8 stars8 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Structured requirements gathering through a series of questions. Use when the task is described verbally/informally (not from an issue tracker ticket) and scope, AC, and edge cases need clarifying before work starts.

SKILL.md

2.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Interview: requirements gathering through questions

Help the user turn an informal task description into complete requirements ready to hand off to the test-cases or testing skills.

When to apply

The task is described verbally or in general terms, without a ticket
No AC, no mockups, no clear scope
The user is unsure what exactly to test/automate

If the task already comes from an issue tracker (Jira etc.) with a full description — this skill is not needed: gather context straight from the ticket (via the tracker's MCP: description, comments, attachments, linked issues) and hand off to test-cases.

Process

Round 1: scope and context. Ask 3-4 questions via AskUserQuestion:

What exactly is being checked (feature, page, element)
Where it lives (URL, screen, navigation path)
Task type (new functionality / regression / bug)
Platforms (desktop / mobile / both)

Round 2: behavior and AC. Based on the round 1 answers:

Happy path — what behavior counts as correct
Edge cases — which negative scenarios matter
UI states (loading, error, empty, disabled) — if applicable
Integrations — any APIs / external services

Round 3: clarifications on remaining gaps. Only if critical gaps remain after rounds 1-2. Group related questions.

Maximum 3 rounds. If the requirements are still incomplete — log the gaps as "Questions for the analyst/PM" and work with what you have.

Output format

Once the interview is done, assemble a structured summary:

# Requirements: <short task name>

## Context
- Type: <new feature / regression / bug>
- Platforms: <desktop / mobile / both>
- URL / location: <…>

## Scope
<what exactly is being checked, briefly>

## Acceptance Criteria
- <AC 1>
- <AC 2>

## Scenarios
**Happy path:** <description>

**Edge cases:**
- <case 1>
- <case 2>

## Integrations
<APIs, external services — if any>

## Open questions for the analyst/PM
- <question 1>

Save the summary to an md file (e.g. requirements_<task_name>.md in the current working directory) and offer to hand it off to test-cases or testing.

What to prefer

4 precise questions beat 10 boilerplate ones
Tie questions to the previous round's answers instead of running down a checklist
If the user answers "don't know" — log it as a question for the analyst, do not push
Use concrete answer options in questions (AskUserQuestion options), not open-ended wording