agentsclimarketplace

Qa edge hunter

Skill nguyenvanphituoc/shapeup-sdlc-plugin/skills/qa-edge-hunter

Shape Up for coding agents — with gates the agent can't talk its way past. A Claude Code plugin that runs idea → pitch → build → eval → ship, with PreToolUse hooks that hard-deny a premature EVAL and progress derived from test artifacts instead of self-report.

Install
npx -y skills add nguyenvanphituoc/shapeup-sdlc-plugin --skill qa-edge-hunter

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

One thing to look at

  • 1 stars1 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

Use this skill for the post-PASS exploratory QA pass — Shape Up's "QA is for the edges", made explicit for the harness. Triggers on: "hunt edge cases", "QA pass on this feature", "exploratory test the running app", "edge hunt before ship", "run qa-edge-hunter", "the evaluator passed — what did it miss?". tech-lead invokes it after the run's first PASS at GATE L3, before SHIP; it also runs standalone given a spec folder, a PASS EVAL report, and a running app, or on a tech-lead --order dispatch. It charters edges OUTSIDE what the evaluator probed and hunts them through six fixed lenses. NOT for checking AC (spec-evaluator), deriving test cases (ba), or fixing bugs (task-executor).

SKILL.md

19.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

QA Edge Hunter — the post-PASS edge pass (v1.1)

Shape Up, Ch. 13: QA comes in toward the end, hunts edge cases outside the core, and its issues are nice-to-haves by default that the team triages. This skill is that role for the harness. It exists because the judge (spec-evaluator) is skeptical only within the spec it is handed — absence of evidence is a FAIL, but absence of a test case is invisible to it. The Hunter covers exactly that blind spot: behavior the spec never wrote down.

tech-lead: ... GATE L2 → EVAL → GATE L3 PASS ──► QA EDGE HUNT (you) ──► SHIP S.0 triage → L4
                                                  charters · hunts · ~ findings → ledger
            GATE L3 FAIL → fix round (never reaches you — conformance first, edges after)

Division of labor (settled at the QA meeting, 2026-06-11):

TierOwnerWhen
Derivable tests (boundaries, error codes, no-go breaches the spec implies)ba ## Test Surface + evaluator test-surface-conformancespec time / every EVAL
Exploratory edges (this skill)/qa-edge-hunteronce, post-first-PASS

What the Hunter is and is not

DoesDoes NOT
Read EVAL-*.md to map covered territory — then hunt OUTSIDE itRe-probe anything the evaluator already graded
Charter edges via six fixed lenses, minus covered territoryAuthor or extend ## Test Surface (that is the planner's retrofit-surface operation)
Execute charters on the running app (session-based exploratory)Read-only speculate from code ("this looks racy") — every finding needs a live repro
Return each finding in the WorkResult's discoveries[], always ~Promote ~ → must-have (PO/TL at SHIP S.0; severity-hint is advice, not a decision)
Emit qa/hunt-report.md — charters run/cut, findings by lensRender a verdict, score, or PASS/FAIL of any kind
--recheck: re-probe ONLY items promoted+fixed after triageRun a second full hunt in the same cycle; fix code; touch task files; keep run-state

Pure worker (harness rule: stateless workers, one stateful orchestrator). Its WorkOrder carries payload.feature, payload.spec_folder, payload.eval_report, payload.app_url (+ read-only ledger path for covered-territory context); its write surface is .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/qa/** only. The Hunter never touches the discovery ledger itself — ingest appends its discoveries[] under a ## Discovered section, preserving single-writer mechanically.


Workflow

⏸ GATE Q0 │ Preflight ────► hard: app running? EVAL verdict PASS? ledger exists?
          │                 soft: Test Surface present? absent → DEGRADED MODE offer
Phase Q1  │ Charter Map ──► 6 lenses × UC tree − covered territory (EVAL-probed rows/AC)
⏸ GATE Q1 │ Charter Review► PO/TL hammer the charter list (QA's own appetite is fixed too)
Phase Q2  │ Hunt ─────────► session per charter on the running app; findings → ledger LIVE
Phase Q3  │ Report ───────► qa/hunt-report.md — no score, no verdict

GATE Q0 — Preflight

HARD (any miss → STOP, report which):
  ✅ app reachable at the given URL (one real request, not a ping)
  ✅ EVAL-FEATURE-<slug>.md exists with verdict: PASS
  ✅ if discovery/ledger.md exists: ledger.feature == <feature> (read-only context check —
     a missing ledger is fine; ingest creates it when your findings land)
SOFT:
  ⚠️ any usecases/UC-*.md has `## Test Surface`?
     NO → DEGRADED MODE:
       "Test Surface absent — derivable cases (boundaries, error codes, no-go breaches)
        were never systematically probed. Lenses ① and ⑤ will widen to compensate
        (charters tagged [derivable-fallback]). Better: run
        a ba-pitch-analyzer retrofit-surface order + one evaluator pass first, then hunt
        with a narrower charter. Continue degraded? [y/n]"
     Degraded is first-class, not an error — for old specs, a degraded hunt beats no hunt.
Questions: max 2. The standing one: "Any areas OUT OF BOUNDS for exploratory testing?
(e.g. real payments, real emails, production data)" — out-of-bounds areas are excluded
from charters and listed in the report, never silently skipped.

Output:

⏸ GATE Q0 — Preflight
App       : [url] ✅ reachable
EVAL      : EVAL-FEATURE-[slug].md — PASS (dims: [...])
Ledger    : [✅ feature match | absent — ingest will create it]
Surface   : [present | ABSENT → degraded mode]
Out-of-bounds? (max 2 questions) …

Phase Q1 — Charter Map

A charter is a hunting ground + a mission — NOT a test case (test cases are the derivable tier; writing them here would re-do ba's job badly). Generate charters by crossing the UC tree with the six fixed lenses, then subtract covered territory.

LensMissionTypical prey
① Boundary overflowInputs the contract never boundedvery long strings, unicode/emoji, 0/negative where unstated, paste-bombs, huge files
② ConcurrencySame action, twice, at oncedouble-submit, two tabs editing one aggregate, rapid re-click on mutation CTAs
③ State interruptionBreak the flow mid-striderefresh mid-wizard, back button after submit, session expiry mid-form, network drop on save
④ Cross-UC journeyChain UCs end-to-endcreate→edit→delete→recreate same entity; output of UC-A as adversarial input to UC-B
⑤ No-go probingIs the excluded path truly absent?direct URLs, API calls bypassing the UI, role escalation to no-go'd features
⑥ Data residueWhat survives that shouldn't?deleted data via old links/exports, prior-session state bleeding, cache after logout

The six lenses are fixed (simplicity as a hard constraint) — scoping happens by cutting charters at GATE Q1, not by configuring lenses.

Charter quality — before generating, internalize the target altitude:

  • Good: "What happens to the order record if the user refreshes the page after clicking Confirm but before the server responds?" → one specific risk, concrete mission, achievable in one session, requires a running app to test.
  • Too broad: "Test the checkout flow" → maps 1:1 with a UC; that is the evaluator's job.
  • Too narrow: "Verify the Confirm button is disabled after click" → this is a derivable test case; it belongs in ## Test Surface, not a charter. A charter is a license to deviate within a hunting ground; a test case is a script.
Q1.0  Read team guidelines: docs/shapeup-sdlc/knowledge-base/qa-edge-hunter.md (if present).
      `/coach`-distilled edge classes that kept biting past features (e.g. "session-expiry
      mid-form keeps surfacing"). Use them to PRIORITIZE charters within the six fixed lenses —
      never to add a seventh lens or skip covered-territory subtraction. Absent = none recorded.
Q1.1  Parse EVAL-*.md → covered set: every TS row probed (test-surface-conformance
      section) + every AC/Done-when graded (spec-conformance section).
Q1.2  Per UC × lens: draft a charter ONLY where the covered set leaves territory.
      Lens ⑤ vs Test Surface D4: TS-NOGO rows probe the no-go AS SPECIFIED; the charter
      hunts UNSPECIFIED breach routes (other URLs, API bypass, role tricks) — overlap
      with a probed row = drop the charter.
Q1.3  Degraded mode: add [derivable-fallback] charters for the uncovered derivable tier
      (lens ① boundary basics; lens ⑤ no-go-as-specified) — tagged so GATE Q1 sees
      exactly which bulk is owed to the missing surface.
Q1.4  Drop charters touching Q0 out-of-bounds areas; list them in the report as
      "excluded (out of bounds)".
Q1.5  Time-box each charter (default 1 session unit ≈ one focused pass; a charter that
      wants more must say why).

⏸ GATE Q1 — Charter Review

The scope hammer applied to QA itself — the Hunter's appetite is as fixed as everyone else's.

⏸ GATE Q1 — Charter Review               [DEGRADED MODE]   ← shown only when degraded
Charters: [N] ([D] derivable-fallback) · est: [N] session units
  C-01 [①boundary]  UC-04 amount field beyond contract silence …
  C-02 [②concurr]   UC-04 double-submit Confirm …
  C-03 [⑤no-go]     export via unauthenticated direct URL …      [derivable-fallback]
  …
Excluded (out of bounds): [list from Q0]
Question (max 1): "Cut or add any charters? (ids / add <desc> / none)"

Cut charters appear in the report under "Hammered out (not hunted)" — visible cuts, never silent ones.


Phase Q2 — Hunt

Session-based exploratory testing per approved charter, on the running app.

Per charter:
  H.1  Execute the mission within its time box. Vary, provoke, chain — follow the scent;
       a charter is a license to deviate INSIDE its ground, not a script.
  H.2  Suspected finding → reproduce it (≥1 clean repro) before recording. No repro →
       log in session notes as "unconfirmed observation", NOT a finding.
  H.3  Confirmed → record it IMMEDIATELY (in the growing WorkResult, not batched to the end
       of the hunt — a crashed session must not lose confirmed findings):

       { "marker": "~",
         "lens": "②concurrency",
         "line": "[QA-NNN] [UC-04] Double-click \"Confirm\" creates 2 orders",
         "repro": "<numbered steps, shortest path>",
         "severity_hint": "data-integrity | boundary-breach | ux-degradation | cosmetic",
         "test_gap": "unit | integration | exploratory-only" }

       Always `~` — ingest appends these to the discovery ledger verbatim; you never open
       the ledger file. severity_hint is the Hunter's advice to triage — the promotion
       decision is PO/TL's at SHIP S.0, never made here.
       test_gap is advisory for reconciliation: unit = a targeted unit test would have
       caught this; integration = a cross-layer test would; exploratory-only = only
       discoverable through live session dynamics.
  H.4  A finding that contradicts a PASSED criterion (the evaluator graded it PASS, the
       hunt shows otherwise) → set `"contradicts": "<EVAL criterion id>"` on the entry.
       Do NOT edit EVAL-*.md or un-tick anything — the judge's record is the judge's; the
       contradiction flag routes it back through triage.
  H.5  Time box expires mid-scent → stop, note "charter exhausted time with open scent"
       in the report. The circuit breaker applies to hunting too.

Lens-specific hunting techniques

Use these as your toolbox when executing a charter. The goal is to provoke the app in ways a spec author wouldn't think to write down.

① Boundary overflow — things the contract never bounded

  • Strings: paste 10 KB of text, emoji sequences (🏳️‍🌈 multi-codepoint), RTL Unicode (؀؁), null bytes (\x00 via DevTools console injection), leading/trailing whitespace
  • Numbers: try -1, 0, 2147483647 (MAX_INT), 2147483648 (MAX_INT+1), floats where integers are expected, strings that look like numbers ("1e9", "Infinity")
  • Files: 0-byte file, file with wrong extension but correct MIME type, size exactly at the stated limit and size+1 byte above it
  • API: send the field missing entirely vs. null vs. "" — three different cases even if the UI treats them the same

② Concurrency — same action, twice, at once

  • Open two tabs or two browsers sharing the same session; navigate both to the same mutation form; submit within milliseconds of each other
  • Rapid double-click on a mutation CTA: check DevTools → Network for duplicate POSTs
  • Optimistic UI: click Save, navigate away immediately before the response arrives; return — was state lost, duplicated, or correctly reconciled?
  • Two different roles editing the same aggregate simultaneously — last-write-wins vs. conflict detection

③ State interruption — break the flow mid-stride

  • Browser Back after submitting step N of a multi-step wizard; then Forward again — is unsaved state preserved, lost, or doubled?
  • Refresh immediately after clicking Submit (before the response) — race between browser reload and server confirmation
  • Network drop mid-save: DevTools → Network → Offline → toggle back; does the app retry, error gracefully, or show stale data?
  • Session expiry mid-form: delete the session cookie (DevTools → Application → Cookies → Delete) then attempt to submit — graceful redirect or silent failure?
  • Tab sleep: leave the tab idle for 10–15 minutes, return, and try a mutation

④ Cross-UC journey — chain UCs end-to-end

  • Create → Edit → Delete → Re-create the same entity with the same name/ID — does the second Create fail with an ID collision, ghost the deleted record, or succeed?
  • Use the output of UC-A as adversarial input to UC-B: if UC-A allows a 500-char name, does UC-B's display truncate, wrap, or break layout?
  • Partial completion of UC-A → switch to UC-B → return to UC-A — is the partial state saved, cleared, or corrupted?

⑤ No-go probing — is the excluded path truly absent?

  • Direct URL: type a protected route into the address bar while unauthenticated or as a lower-privilege role
  • API replay: in DevTools → Network, copy a privileged request as cURL, strip the auth cookie, replay — does the server reject it?
  • DOM enable: find a disabled/hidden UI element, element.disabled = false or element.style.display = 'block' in the console, submit — does the server validate server-side?
  • Path traversal in URL params (../, %2F..) for file/export endpoints

⑥ Data residue — what survives that shouldn't?

  • Delete an entity, then navigate to its detail URL via browser history — 404, redirect, or stale cached data?
  • Log out, log back in (same browser, same session storage) — does the new session show any leftover state from the prior session?
  • DevTools → Application → Cache Storage / Local Storage / IndexedDB after logout — is sensitive data cleared?
  • Re-download a previously generated export URL after the source data was deleted — does the export still serve the old data?

Phase Q3 — Report + WorkResult

Write .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/qa/hunt-report.md (your substrate) and, when dispatched with an order, the WorkResult envelope .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/results/<order-suffix>.json: status: done, discoveries[] (every confirmed finding from H.3), artifacts: ["qa/hunt-report.md"]. The report:

# Hunt Report — [feature] (round [r], [date])
mode: [full | degraded | recheck]
charters: [run]/[approved] · session units spent: [n]
out of bounds (excluded): […]
hammered out at GATE Q1 (not hunted): […]

## Findings by lens
| Lens | Hunted | Findings | Of which contradicts-EVAL |
|---|---|---|---|
| ① Boundary | C-01, C-05 | 2 | 0 |
| … | | | |
→ details live in .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/discovery/ledger.md ## QA Edge Findings (round [r])

## Shaping-quality signal (advisory, for the PO — next cycle's input)
- lens ⑤ findings ≈ No-gos written loosely (breach routes left open)
- lens ④ findings ≈ UC decomposition cut too disjointly (journeys fall in the seams)
- lens ① in degraded mode ≈ owed to the missing Test Surface, not to shaping

## Session notes
[per charter: what was tried, unconfirmed observations, open scents]

No verdict line exists in this file by design. The Hunter's last words: ✅ hunt complete — [N] findings (all ~) → ledger · triage at SHIP S.0 / GATE L4.


--recheck mode (after triage promoted + fixed items)

Input: the promoted finding ids (from tech-lead) + the fix round's PASS EVAL report.
Q0   : hard checks only (app up, new EVAL PASS); no soft check, no charter map.
Hunt : re-run EXACTLY the recorded repro of each promoted finding — nothing else.
        fixed   → discoveries[] entry `{ "marker": "~", "line": "[QA-NNN] ✦ fixed r[N], verified" }`
                  (ingest annotates the ledger — annotate, never delete; the ledger is history)
        not fixed → `{ "marker": "~", "line": "[QA-NNN] ✦ NOT fixed r[N]", "repro": "<fresh evidence>" }`
                  back to triage.
Report: append a `## Recheck (round [r])` section to .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/qa/hunt-report.md.
NEVER a second full hunt in the same cycle — new edges found while rechecking are
recorded `~` like any finding and wait for triage; they don't restart the loop.

Invocation

# Orchestrated (how tech-lead calls it after first PASS) — the canonical form:
#   compile-order --operation hunt --slug checkout-vnpay --worker qa-edge-hunter \
#     --payload '{"eval_report": "…/EVAL-FEATURE-checkout-vnpay.md", "app_url": "http://localhost:3000"}'
/qa-edge-hunter --order .shapeup-sdlc/checkout-vnpay/orders/hunt.json

# Standalone flags (the preamble shim compiles the same envelope)
/qa-edge-hunter --feature checkout-vnpay --spec docs/shapeup-sdlc/checkout-vnpay/spec/ \
    --eval .shapeup-sdlc/checkout-vnpay/evaluation/EVAL-FEATURE-checkout-vnpay.md \
    --ledger .shapeup-sdlc/checkout-vnpay/discovery/ledger.md --app http://localhost:3000

# Standalone (same arguments, human-invoked)
/qa-edge-hunter --feature checkout-vnpay --spec docs/shapeup-sdlc/checkout-vnpay/spec/ --app http://localhost:3000
# (--eval/--ledger default to the conventional paths under the LOCAL root .shapeup-sdlc/<feature>/)

# Recheck after triage promoted + fixed findings
/qa-edge-hunter --recheck QA-001,QA-004 --feature checkout-vnpay --spec ... --app ...

# Escape hatches
--auto            # skip GATE Q1 pause (charter list logged, not reviewed) — Q0 hard
                  # checks and the out-of-bounds question are NEVER skipped
--lenses-note     # there is deliberately NO --lenses flag: the 6 lenses are fixed;
                  # narrow by cutting charters at GATE Q1 (or --auto + report)

Progress Markers

⏸ GATE Q0   Preflight (hard + soft checks, out-of-bounds question)
▶ Phase Q1  Charter Map        ⏸ GATE Q1 Charter Review
▶ Phase Q2  Hunt — C-01 ✅ C-02 🔍 …   (findings stream to ledger live)
▶ Phase Q3  Report
✅ hunt complete — [N] findings (all ~) → ledger · triage at SHIP S.0 / GATE L4

Hard rules (the never-list)

  1. Never a verdict. The run's verdict is the evaluator's PASS. One judge.
  2. Never promote. Every finding is born ~. severity-hint advises; PO/TL decide.
  3. Never fix. Read-only on code; execute-only on the app; write-only to qa/hunt-report.md + its own WorkResult (findings return as data; ingest owns the ledger).
  4. Never block ship. A hunt with 40 findings and a hunt with 0 both end the same way: report, then triage at L4. The circuit breaker outranks the Hunter.
  5. Never re-probe covered territory. EVAL-*.md territory is subtracted at Q1; an exception requires a contradicts: suspicion arising mid-hunt, not curiosity.
  6. Never run on FAIL. Conformance first; edges after.
  7. Never invent severity from code reading. Every finding has a live repro on the running app.
  8. Never gate on Test Surface. Its absence degrades the hunt; it never blocks it.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.