Process a single user testing feedback item — classify, fix or log, verify, and report.
Scanned 9/22/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add joris887/exosuit --skill testing-cycle --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Testing Cycle?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/joris887-testing-cycle)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: testing-cycle
version: 2.4.0
description: Process a single user testing feedback item — classify, fix or log, verify, and report.
trigger: manual
depends-on: []
references: []
disable-model-invocation: true
user-invocable: true
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash, Edit, Write
argument-hint: "<feedback-description>"
---
______________________________________________________________________
## testing-cycle
Processing feedback: **$ARGUMENTS**
## Phase 1: Classify Feedback
Analyze the feedback and assign a classification:
| Type | Indicators | Effort |
| --------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------- |
| Bug (Critical) | Functionality broken, crash, data loss, core feature | High |
| Bug (Minor) | UI glitch, cosmetic, edge case, non-blocking | Low |
| Gap | Missing feature, expected capability not implemented | Backlog |
| Test Correction | Automated test tests wrong behavior, false positive | Medium |
| Enhancement | UX improvement, better wording, nice-to-have | Varies |
**Present the classification to the user for confirmation before proceeding.**
Show:
- **Feedback**: (original, quoted)
- **Classification**: \[type\]
- **Rationale**: (why this classification)
- **Proposed action**: (what will be done)
Wait for user confirmation. They may reclassify.
## Phase 2: Act by Type
### Bug (Critical)
1. **Investigate**: Find relevant code, understand the root cause
- Search for related files using the feedback keywords
- Read the relevant source files
- Check if there's an existing test covering this behavior
1. **Test first**:
- If a test exists but tests the wrong thing → fix the test first (it should now fail)
- If no test exists → write a failing test that captures the bug
- Run the test to confirm it fails
1. **Fix the code**: Make the minimal change to fix the bug
1. **Verify tests pass**: Run the project's test command (from CLAUDE.md)
1. **Ask user to verify**: "Can you verify this fix in the running app?"
1. **Commit**: `fix(scope): description`
### Bug (Minor)
1. **Identify** the issue in code
1. **Fix** the code (minimal change)
1. **Add test** only if the behavior is non-trivial or regression-prone
1. **Run** the project's test command
1. **Commit**: `fix(scope): description`
### Gap
1. **Document** the gap clearly
1. **Write a user story** with:
- Type, estimated effort
- Description explaining what's missing and why it matters
- INVEST-style acceptance criteria
- Technical notes if relevant
1. **Add to** the appropriate backlog file in `docs/reference/backlog/`:
- Add the story section (use next available story number)
- Update the summary table
1. **Update** `docs/reference/BACKLOG_INDEX.md` if a new story was added
1. **Do NOT implement** — this is scope control
1. **Report** what was logged
### Test Correction
1. **Find** the problematic test
1. **Understand** the correct behavior from user feedback
1. **Fix the test** to match correct behavior
1. **Run the corrected test** — if it now fails, also fix the code
1. **Run** the project's test command
1. **Commit**: `test(scope): correct [description]` (add `fix` prefix if code also changed)
### Enhancement
1. **Evaluate scope**:
- Trivial (< 10 lines, obvious improvement) → ask user if should fix now
- Larger → create backlog story (same process as Gap)
1. **Act accordingly**:
- If fixing now: implement, test, commit as `feat(scope):` or `fix(scope):`
- If deferring: log to backlog and report
## Phase 3: Verify
After any code change:
1. Run the project's test command (from CLAUDE.md) to verify all tests pass
1. If the app is running, ask the user: "Can you verify this in the running app?"
1. If tests fail, fix the issue before proceeding
## Phase 4: Report
Present a summary:
```markdown
### Feedback Processed
**Feedback:** [original feedback]
**Classification:** [type]
**Action taken:** [what was done]
**Files modified:** [list of files]
**Tests:** [added/modified/none] — tests [pass/fail]
**Commit:** [hash and message] (or "logged to backlog as [story-ID]" for gaps)
Ready for next feedback item (`/testing-cycle <feedback>`) or finish testing.
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!