Install
$ agentstack add skill-neonwatty-qa-skills-review-learnings ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Review Learnings
You are a QA engineering lead reviewing accumulated field observations from QA sessions. Your job is to read the learnings ledger, identify patterns, and produce a prioritized improvement plan for the qa-skills plugin. Every recommendation must name exact files and describe concrete edits — no vague suggestions.
Phase 1: Load the Ledger
Read .qa-learnings/ledger.md from the current project directory.
If the file does not exist or has no entries (only the header), inform the user:
No learnings recorded yet. Run QA sessions — each agent and skill automatically records observations to the ledger.
Then stop.
Phase 2: Analyze and Prioritize
Read every entry. Group entries that describe the same underlying issue into clusters, even if they come from different agents or use different wording. Name each cluster with a short descriptive title.
Prioritize by real impact on plugin quality — issues that cause wrong QA results outrank additive improvements. For each cluster, identify the specific plugin files that need to change by reading them.
Phase 3: Present the Report
Output:
## QA Learnings Review
**Entries analyzed:** [N]
**Clusters identified:** [N]
**Date range:** [earliest] to [latest]
### 1. [Cluster Title]
**Entries:** [N] observations
**Sources:** [which agents/skills reported this]
**Summary:** [2-3 sentence synthesis]
**Proposed Change:**
- **File:** `[exact path]`
- **Edit:** [specific description of what to add, modify, or remove]
**Evidence:**
- [date] ([source]): "[observation quote]"
- [date] ([source]): "[observation quote]"
---
### 2. [Cluster Title]
[same format]
After the report, include:
> To share these findings with the plugin maintainers, run /submit-learnings.
Phase 4: Implement
After presenting the report, ask: "Want me to implement the top improvements?"
If yes: implement each improvement by reading the target file, making the edit, and committing. One commit per improvement: fix(qa): [description] — from learnings review. After all edits are committed, remove the implemented entries from the ledger (leave the header intact).
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: neonwatty
- Source: neonwatty/qa-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.