Exploratory test
A composable dev process for agentic coding harnesses, packaged as modular skills. Turbo has sibling editions for Claude Code and Codex.
npx -y skills add tobihagemann/turbo --skill exploratory-testAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Execute multi-level exploratory testing of the app covering basic functionality, complex operations, adversarial testing, and cross-cutting scenarios, plus usability observations through a UX lens reported separately from defects. Deeper than $smoke-test. Use when the user asks to "exploratory test", "test thoroughly", "test all scenarios", "deep test", "test edge cases", "test everything", "break it", "find bugs by testing", "test usability", or "check the UX while testing".
SKILL.md
6.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Exploratory Test
Execute multi-level exploratory testing that goes beyond smoke testing to actively find bugs through escalating test scenarios.
Task Tracking
At the start, use update_plan to track each step, restating any remaining steps of a parent workflow alongside them:
- Load or create test plan
- Determine testing approach
- Run
$user-experienceskill (when user-facing) - Execute tests by level
- Report
Step 1: Load or Create Test Plan
Resolve the test plan using these rules in order:
- Explicit path — If the user passed a file path, use it
- Explicit slug — resolve to
.turbo/test-plans/<slug>.md - Anchoring artifact — If the work under test is anchored to a plan, shell, or spec, resolve to
.turbo/test-plans/<that-slug>.mdwhen that file exists - Single file — Glob
.turbo/test-plans/*.md. If exactly one file exists, use it - Most recent — If multiple files exist, use the most recently modified
- Legacy fallback —
.turbo/test-plan.mdif.turbo/test-plans/does not exist - Nothing found — run the
$create-test-planskill first, then use the plan it writes
If multiple test plans exist and the most-recent choice is non-obvious, use request_user_input to let the user pick from the candidates.
Read the resolved test plan and state its path. If the user specifies a narrower scope, filter the plan to relevant scenarios rather than executing all of them.
Step 2: Determine Testing Approach
Use the approach specified in the test plan. If the plan does not specify one, determine it using the same logic as $create-test-plan Step 3.
Step 3: Run $user-experience Skill (When User-Facing)
If the app has a user-facing surface (UI, screens, commands, messages, or any behavior a user sees or does), run the $user-experience skill to load the UX lens before executing tests, so usability concerns surface while interacting with the app. When it is unclear whether the surface is user-facing, use request_user_input to ask rather than skipping silently. Skip this step for test targets with no user-facing behavior (internal library or infrastructure).
Step 4: Execute Tests by Level
Work through each level sequentially. Complete all tests in a level before moving to the next.
Execution Loop (Per Test)
- Set up the preconditions described in the test scenario
- Perform the exact steps
- Capture the result (screenshot, output, or state observation)
- Compare against the expected outcome
- Record PASS or FAIL with details
- When the UX lens is loaded, note any usability observation it surfaces, kept separate from the PASS/FAIL verdict
Level Progression
- Level 1: Basic Functionality — If any Level 1 test fails, report early and use
request_user_inputto ask whether to continue. Basic failures may indicate the feature is too broken for deeper testing. - Level 2: Complex Operations — Execute all tests regardless of individual failures.
- Level 3: Adversarial Testing — Execute all tests. Failures here are expected and valuable.
- Level 4: Cross-Cutting Scenarios — Execute all tests.
If a project-specific testing skill or MCP tool was identified in Step 2, use that. The paths below are fallbacks.
Web App Path
Start the dev server if not already running. Wait for it to be ready. Use the browser-use@openai-bundled plugin to interact with the app.
UI/Native App Path
Launch the app. Use the computer-use@openai-bundled plugin to interact with the UI.
CLI Path
Run commands directly.
Step 5: Report
Present results organized by level:
Exploratory Test Results:
## Level 1: Basic Functionality (X/Y passed)
- [PASS] Test name: description
- [FAIL] Test name: description — [what went wrong]
## Level 2: Complex Operations (X/Y passed)
- [PASS] Test name: description
- [FAIL] Test name: description — [what went wrong]
## Level 3: Adversarial Testing (X/Y passed)
- [PASS] Test name: description
- [FAIL] Test name: description — [what went wrong]
## Level 4: Cross-Cutting Scenarios (X/Y passed)
- [PASS] Test name: description
- [FAIL] Test name: description — [what went wrong]
Overall: X/Y passed across all levels
Report usability observations from the UX lens below the level results, separately from the PASS/FAIL defects. A scenario can pass every functional check and still surface a usability concern.
## Usability Observations
- [UX] <observation> — names the UX context it touches (Understanding, Bridging, or Flowing) and the goal mismatch or friction it creates
For each failure, include the relevant screenshot, output, or state observation.
Update the resolved test plan file by checking off completed tests and annotating results.
Then call update_plan to mark this step completed and continue with the next step of the active workflow.
Rules
- Always clean up: close browser sessions, stop dev servers started by this skill.
- Isolate shared process state so concurrent or sub-agent runs don't collide: bind dev servers and services to unique ports, scope tmux sessions (
tmux -L <name>), and write screenshots and other scratch state to absolute paths under a unique scratch directory outside the repository under test. - Never modify application code. This skill is read-only verification. Report failures without attempting to fix them.
- If the dev server fails to start, report the error and stop.
- Tail app logs in a background shell for errors or warnings while running tests, so backend failures surface alongside test observations.
- To diagnose failures, run the
$investigateskill on the test report.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most test skills give
Counted across 964 of the 1,571 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- close the browser when donein 55 of 964, across 12 files
- wait for network idle statein 51 of 964, across 6 files
- launch chromium in headless modein 49 of 964, across 6 files
- use descriptive selectors for elementsin 49 of 964, across 6 files
- run provided scripts with help flag firstin 49 of 964, across 6 files
- add appropriate explicit waitsin 48 of 964, across 5 files
- use bundled scripts as black boxesin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- do not read script source codein 46 of 964, across 3 files
- use sync playwright for scriptsin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- inspect dom before executing actionsin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- run the full test suitein 36 of 964, across 34 files
- write the failing test firstin 25 of 964, across 18 files
Said here and by no other author read
- resolve or create the test plan
- use the approach specified in the test plan
- run the user-experience skill if app is user-facing
- ask the user if it is unclear whether surface is user-facing
- execute tests sequentially by level
- compare the result against the expected outcome
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.