Qa patterns
QA and testing reference - test strategy, patterns, coverage, CI/CD integration, and quality metrics. Language-agnostic. Use when designing test strategies, reviewing test quality, setting up CI/CD quality gates, or selecting testing tools.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add Rixmerz/flowtrace-debugger --skill qa-patternsAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 3 stars3 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.
SKILL.md
3.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
QA & Testing Architecture Reference (2024-2025)
Comprehensive language-agnostic reference for testing and quality assurance decisions. Use $ARGUMENTS to focus on a specific area, or browse all sections.
Quick Navigation
- For testing tools and frameworks by category, see frameworks.md
- For testing design patterns (AAA, POM, TDD, anti-patterns), see design-patterns.md
- For test architecture (pyramid, CI/CD, quality gates, microservices), see architecture.md
- For best practices (naming, flaky tests, coverage, metrics), see best-practices.md
- For testing concepts (performance, security, contract, chaos), see testing-concepts.md
Decision Framework
- Test Pyramid: 70% unit / 20% integration / 10% E2E
- Unit framework: Vitest (JS/TS), pytest (Python), JUnit 5 (Java), Go
testing, Swift Testing, RSpec (Ruby), NUnit/xUnit (.NET) - E2E/UI: Playwright (web), Appium (mobile)
- Performance: k6
- Contract testing: Pact
- Security: SonarQube (SAST), OWASP ZAP (DAST), Snyk (dependency scanning)
- Mutation testing: Stryker (JS/TS/.NET), PIT (Java), mutmut (Python)
- BDD: Cucumber (multi-language), Behave (Python), SpecFlow (.NET)
Testing Approach Comparison
| Aspect | TDD | BDD | Exploratory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who writes | Developer | Dev + QA + PO | QA / Tester |
| When | Before code | Before/during feature | After feature |
| Language | Code (assertions) | Gherkin (Given/When/Then) | Session notes |
| Primary value | Design feedback, regression safety | Shared understanding, living docs | Find unexpected bugs |
| Cost | Medium (upfront investment) | High (3-layer translation) | Low (no automation) |
| Best for | Logic-heavy code, APIs | User-facing features, acceptance | Complex UX, edge cases |
| Output | Unit/integration tests | Executable specifications | Bug reports, test charters |
Quality Maturity Levels
| Level | Description | Key Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| 0 - Ad hoc | No formal testing | Manual testing only, no CI |
| 1 - Reactive | Some unit tests | Tests written after bugs, <30% coverage |
| 2 - Managed | Consistent testing | CI pipeline, >60% coverage, test reviews |
| 3 - Proactive | Quality-first | TDD, >80% coverage, quality gates, mutation testing |
| 4 - Optimized | Continuous improvement | Metrics-driven, chaos engineering, shift-left security |
Related Skills
- dev-patterns — Language-agnostic design principles