flow-next-qa
Live-app real-user QA pass derived from the spec. Drives the running app via flow-next-drive, derives scenarios from the spec's AC / R-IDs / boundaries, files structured P0/P1/P2 findings with evidence, and ends with a YES/NO ship verdict receipt. Triggers on /flow-next:qa with a spec id. FORBIDDEN from marking PASS by reading source — the verdict rests on captured evidence from the live app, never on agent narration.
What this skill does
# /flow-next:qa — live-app real-user QA pass
flow-next's review surface today is all static: `impl-review`, `spec-completion-review`, `quality-auditor`, `code-review`. Nothing drives the *running* app like an unforgiving real user. `/flow-next:qa` fills that gap — it drives the deployed app (via **fn-51 flow-next-drive**), files structured P0/P1/P2 findings with evidence, and ends with a YES/NO ship verdict emitted as a proof-of-work receipt.
The differentiator vs spec-less QA tools is **the spec is the source of intent**: flow-next derives test scenarios directly from the spec — acceptance criteria → scenarios, R-IDs → coverage, boundaries → what NOT to test, decision context → expected behavior. The host already encodes intent instead of reconstructing it. The QA discipline (P0/P1/P2 taxonomy, evidence rules, session hygiene) is a lean borrow from Ray Fernando's `running-bug-review-board` skill (Apache-2.0 — credited in CHANGELOG); flow-next stays lean (no 18-reference port, ≤500-line skill cap).
**Read [workflow.md](workflow.md) for the full phase-by-phase execution** (discover → derive → prepare → execute → file → verdict).
## The hard rule — PASS is forbidden from source inspection
**QA must NEVER mark PASS (SHIP) by reading source code.** A live-app QA pass is the gap that all other flow-next review already covers statically. The verdict rests on **captured evidence from the running app** — screenshots, console dumps, observed state — never on agent narration, never on "the code looks correct", never on inferring behavior from the diff. If no live app is reachable (no deploy or no driver), the outcome is **BLOCKED** (could not verify), not PASS. This rule is load-bearing — it is what makes the skill a real-user QA pass rather than a second static review.
## Preamble
**CRITICAL: flowctl is BUNDLED — NOT installed globally.** `which flowctl` will fail (expected). Define once; subsequent blocks (here and in `workflow.md`) use `$FLOWCTL`. Subagents that run in fresh context fall back to the repo-local copy:
```bash
FLOWCTL="$HOME/.codex/scripts/flowctl"
[ -x "$FLOWCTL" ] || FLOWCTL=".flow/bin/flowctl"
```
**Ask the user via plain text.** Render the options below as a numbered list `1.` … `N.`, followed by a final option `N+1. Other — type your own answer`. Print the question, then the numbered list, then **stop and wait for the user's next message before continuing**. Parse the reply as: a bare number `1`–`N+1` → that option; the literal text of an option label → that option; free text after `Other` → custom answer.
**Inline skill (no `context: fork`)** — runs on the host agent, not a forked subagent, because the **prepare** phase must ask the user for undocumented facts (target URL / test account — info-only, never a confirm gate) and a forked subagent cannot ask the user back (Claude Code issues #12890, #34592). The host asks via `plain-text numbered prompt`.
## Mode Detection
Parse `$ARGUMENTS`. The first non-flag token is the spec id (required). The value-taking caller overrides the downstream phases honor — `--target <url>` (Phase 3.1), `--receipt <path>` (Phase 6.3), and `--base <ref>` (§1.2 base-branch override) — **must consume their operand here** (both `--flag value` and `--flag=value` forms, mirroring make-pr's `--base`), or the operand falls through to the `*)` arm and is mis-assigned as `SPEC_ID` (Phase 1 then rejects the URL/path as "Not a spec"). They populate `QA_TARGET_URL` / `QA_RECEIPT_OVERRIDE` / `QA_BASE_REF` — the exact variables Phases 3.1 / 6.3 / §1.2 read. Other flags (viewport, autonomy) are reserved for later tasks; the skeleton shifts them harmlessly.
```bash
RAW_ARGS="$ARGUMENTS"
SPEC_ID=""
set -- $RAW_ARGS
while [[ $# -gt 0 ]]; do
case "$1" in
--target) QA_TARGET_URL="$2"; shift 2 ;; # Phase 3.1 caller override
--target=*) QA_TARGET_URL="${1#--target=}"; shift ;;
--receipt) QA_RECEIPT_OVERRIDE="$2"; shift 2 ;; # Phase 6.3 receipt path
--receipt=*) QA_RECEIPT_OVERRIDE="${1#--receipt=}"; shift ;;
--base) QA_BASE_REF="$2"; shift 2 ;; # §1.2 base-branch override
--base=*) QA_BASE_REF="${1#--base=}"; shift ;;
--) shift; break ;;
-*) echo "Unknown flag: $1 (reserved for a later task)" >&2; shift ;;
*) [[ -z "$SPEC_ID" ]] && SPEC_ID="$1"; shift ;;
esac
done
export QA_TARGET_URL QA_RECEIPT_OVERRIDE QA_BASE_REF # carry the resolved overrides into workflow.md Phases 3.1 / 6.3 / §1.2
```
When `SPEC_ID` is empty, the **discover** phase resolves it (branch-match, or by asking the user via `plain-text numbered prompt` as an info prompt) — never silently default.
Ralph mode (`FLOW_RALPH=1` or `REVIEW_RECEIPT_PATH` set) is detected in workflow.md §AUTONOMY — the skill is **aware but not Ralph-blocked** (R11). The deep autonomy routing (autonomous when target URL + accounts are configured; receipt path resolution) is owned by a downstream task; the skeleton only lays the section anchor.
## fn-51 consumption — a read-and-drive contract, NOT a callable API
A skill is not a function. QA does **NOT** "call" flow-next-drive. The host agent **reads fn-51's workflow + references and executes the universal driving flow itself** — `observe → snapshot fresh refs → act → verify → capture`. fn-51 owns the driver ladder and all actuation prose; QA owns scenario authoring, evidence capture, and the verdict. **Never duplicate CDP / agent-browser / Computer-Use prose here** — point at fn-51's references:
- Surface detection + universal flow + the web/native ladder: `plugins/flow-next/skills/flow-next-drive/SKILL.md`
- Driver command detail (per rung): `plugins/flow-next/skills/flow-next-drive/references/` (`agent-browser.md`, `chrome-devtools-mcp.md`, `playwright.md`, `computer-use.md`, …)
Per scenario, record an **evidence tuple**: `{driver_rung, target_url, viewport, screenshot_path, console_path}`. fn-51's SKILL.md (`:83`) explicitly defers the QA workflow — scenario authoring, bug filing, verdict — downstream to this skill; the seam is designed, QA orchestrates and fn-51 actuates.
## Forbidden
- **Marking PASS / SHIP from source inspection.** See "The hard rule" above. PASS requires captured live-app evidence; no live app → BLOCKED, never PASS.
- **Re-implementing driving.** QA consumes fn-51 via the read-and-drive contract; it never reimplements CDP / agent-browser / Computer Use, and never duplicates fn-51's ladder prose.
- **Inventing findings or evidence.** Every finding cites real captured evidence (screenshot / console / URL). No "I think this might be broken" without a reproduction.
- **Ralph-blocking the skill.** QA is aware of Ralph but is not a hard Ralph-block (R11). Do NOT add a `FLOW_RALPH`/`REVIEW_RECEIPT_PATH` exit-2 guard at the top of the skill.
## Workflow
Execute the phases in [workflow.md](workflow.md) in order:
1. **discover** — resolve the spec id (arg / branch-match / info prompt); pull the cognitive-aid payload.
2. **derive** — AC → scenarios, R-IDs → coverage spine, boundaries → exclusions, decision context → expected behavior.
3. **prepare** — target URL, test accounts, session hygiene, device matrix. *(Owned by a downstream task; section anchor laid here.)*
4. **execute** — drive the live app via the fn-51 read-and-drive contract; capture the evidence tuple per scenario. *(Owned by a downstream task; section anchor laid here.)*
5. **file** — structured P0/P1/P2 findings with evidence; feed the bug memory track. *(Owned by a downstream task.)*
6. **verdict** — YES/NO ship verdict + open P0/P1 list; emit the `qa_verdict` receipt. *(Owned by a downstream task.)*
This task (fn-53.1) stands up the **skeleton** (all six phase anchors) plus the working **discover** and **derive** phases, and proves the thesis end-to-end (derive ≥1 scenario → dispatch through the fn-51 contract → record an evidence tuple, or a BLOCKED proof receipt when no live target exists). Phases 3-6 are filled by serial downstream tasks editing their own disjoint section anchors.
Related in AI Agents
skill-development
IncludedComprehensive meta-skill for creating, managing, validating, auditing, and distributing Claude Code skills and slash commands (unified in v2.1.3+). Provides skill templates, creation workflows, validation patterns, audit checklists, naming conventions, YAML frontmatter guidance, progressive disclosure examples, and best practices lookup. Use when creating new skills, validating existing skills, auditing skill quality, understanding skill architecture, needing skill templates, learning about YAML frontmatter requirements, progressive disclosure patterns, tool restrictions (allowed-tools), skill composition, skill naming conventions, troubleshooting skill activation issues, creating custom slash commands, configuring command frontmatter, using command arguments ($ARGUMENTS, $1, $2), bash execution in commands, file references in commands, command namespacing, plugin commands, MCP slash commands, Skill tool configuration, or deciding between skills vs slash commands. Delegates to docs-management skill for official documentation.
reprompter
IncludedTransform messy prompts into well-structured, effective prompts — single or multi-agent. Use when: "reprompt", "reprompt this", "clean up this prompt", "structure my prompt", rough text needing XML tags and best practices, "reprompter teams", "repromptception", "run with quality", "smart run", "smart agents", multi-agent tasks, audits, parallel work, anything going to agent teams. Don't use when: simple Q&A, pure chat, immediate execution-only tasks. See "Don't Use When" section for details. Outputs: Structured XML/Markdown prompt, quality score (before/after), optional team brief + per-agent sub-prompts, agent team output files. Success criteria: Single mode quality score ≥ 7/10; Repromptception per-agent prompt quality score 8+/10; all required sections present, actionable and specific.
adaptive-compaction
IncludedAdaptive add-on policy and recovery layer that decides WHEN to compact, prune, snapshot, or fork -- replacing fixed-percent auto-compaction across Claude Code, Codex, and MCP-capable hosts. Trigger on auto-compact timing or damage: "when should I compact", "is it safe to compact now or start a fresh session", "auto-compact fires too early/mid-task", "switching to an unrelated task but the window still has space", "context rot", "answers get worse the longer the session runs", "the agent forgot the plan or my decisions after it summarized", "add a layer on top that manages context without changing the agent", raising autoCompactWindow to give the policy room, or installing/tuning a cross-tool compaction policy or PreCompact hook -- even when "compaction" is never said but the problem is context-window pressure or post-summarization memory loss. Do NOT use to summarize a conversation, build RAG, write a summarization prompt (decides WHEN not HOW), or answer max-context-length trivia.
agent-skill-creator
IncludedCreate cross-platform agent skills from workflow descriptions. Activates when users ask to create an agent, automate a repetitive workflow, create a custom skill, or need advanced agent creation. Triggers on phrases like create agent for, automate workflow, create skill for, every day I have to, daily I need to, turn process into agent, need to automate, create a cross-platform skill, validate this skill, export this skill, migrate this skill. Supports single skills, multi-agent suites, transcript processing, template-based creation, interactive configuration, cross-platform export, and spec validation.
llm-wiki
IncludedUse when building or maintaining a persistent personal knowledge base (second brain) in Obsidian where an LLM incrementally ingests sources, updates entity/concept pages, maintains cross-references, and keeps a synthesis current. Triggers include "second brain", "Obsidian wiki", "personal knowledge management", "ingest this paper/article/book", "build a research wiki", "compound knowledge", "Memex", or whenever the user wants knowledge to accumulate across sessions instead of being re-derived by RAG on every query.
skill-master
IncludedAgent Skills authoring, evaluation, and optimization. Create, edit, validate, benchmark, and improve skills following the agentskills.io specification. Use when designing SKILL.md files, structuring skill folders (references, scripts, assets), ingesting external documentation into skills, running trigger evals, benchmarking skill quality, optimizing descriptions, or performing blind A/B comparisons. Keywords: agentskills.io, SKILL.md, skill authoring, eval, benchmark, trigger optimization.