qa-gate
Final quality validation gate for any artifact before human review. Run this skill on documents, skills, PRDs, blog posts, or code artifacts to validate factual accuracy, tone consistency, completeness, structural integrity, operational soundness, and sensitive data handling. Use when you need to "QA gate this", "validate before publish", run a "final check", perform "quality validation", proofread this, fact-check this, or otherwise validate, QA, or quality-gate an artifact before review, release, or publication.
Install via CLI (Recommended)
clawhub install openclaw/skills/skills/bloodandeath/qa-gateQA Gate
Final release gate for any artifact before human review. Every document, skill, blog post, PRD, or code output should pass this gate before the principal sees it.
This is not a code review skill. It is a release gate that determines whether an artifact is ready to move forward.
When to Use
- After any ralphy loop completes a PRD
- Before presenting any deliverable to the principal
- When self-reviewing documents, code, skills, or blog posts
- As the final step before publishing to ClawHub or Gumroad
- When asked to "QA gate this," "validate before publish," "final check," or run a "quality gate"
Optional Mode
--dual: Use cross-model QA validation when the artifact is high-stakes, ambiguous, or worth the extra cost/latency for a second independent quality pass.
Process
Step 1: Read the artifact completely
Read the entire file. Do not skim. Understand the structure, voice, and intent.
Step 2: Validate against 6 dimensions
1. Factual Accuracy
- Are all claims verifiable?
- Are research citations correct (paper titles, arXiv IDs, findings)?
- Are technical procedures feasible as described?
- Are tool/API references accurate for the current version?
2. Tone & Voice Consistency
- Does the document maintain its intended voice throughout?
- No tonal drift between sections?
- No marketing fluff, tutorial-speak, or filler?
- Appropriate for the target audience (agent, human, or both)?
3. Completeness
- No placeholders (TODO, TBD, FIXME, PLACEHOLDER, [FILL IN])?
- All sections referenced in TOC/structure are present?
- All promised content is delivered?
- No orphaned references or dead links?
4. Structural Integrity
- Heading hierarchy is clean (no skipped levels)?
- Code blocks are properly fenced and syntactically valid?
- Section anchors work?
- Back-links resolve to valid targets?
- Markdown renders correctly?
5. Operational Soundness (for technical documents)
- Procedures are implementable as described?
- Configuration formats match the actual system?
- Commands and scripts are executable?
- Edge cases are addressed?
6. Sensitive Data Check
- No personal information (real names, schedules, addresses)?
- No API keys, tokens, or secrets?
- No internal-only references that shouldn't be public?
- Examples use fictional/generic data?
Step 3: Produce gate verdict
Output must include a clear gate result:
PASS — ready for human review
or
PASS WITH FIXES
- MINOR [location]: issue description
or
FAIL
- CRITICAL [location]: issue description
- MAJOR [location]: issue description
- MINOR [location]: issue description
Step 4: If FAIL, fix and re-validate
Fix all CRITICAL and MAJOR issues. Re-run the gate. Only present to principal after PASS or PASS WITH FIXES.
Integration with PRD Workflows
Add to any PRD as a verification step:
Metadata
Not sure this is the right skill?
Describe what you want to build — we'll match you to the best skill from 16,000+ options.
Find the right skillPaste this into your clawhub.json to enable this plugin.
{
"plugins": {
"official-bloodandeath-qa-gate": {
"enabled": true,
"auto_update": true
}
}
}Related Skills
design-engineering
Orchestrate iterative design and frontend engineering work through research, planning, sub-agent execution, and validation loops. Use when a visual/UI task requires multiple iterations, when the first implementation needs refinement based on feedback, when choosing between competing technical approaches (Canvas vs SVG vs CSS), or when coordinating sub-agents on design-heavy work. Covers animation architecture decisions, progressive enhancement patterns, performance-aware rendering choices, and the research→plan→execute→validate workflow. Complements frontend-design (which handles aesthetics) by adding engineering discipline, iteration management, and technical decision-making.
agent-cost-monitor
Real-time token usage and cost tracking across all your OpenClaw agents — alerts, budgets, and optimization tips
web-monitor
Monitor web pages for content changes and get alerts. Track URLs, detect updates, view diffs. Use when asked to watch a website, track changes on a page, monitor for new posts/content, set up page change alerts, or check if a site has been updated. Supports CSS selectors for targeted monitoring.
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
code-reviewer
Conduct rigorous, adversarial code reviews with zero tolerance for mediocrity. Default behavior is a single-model adversarial review that identifies security holes, lazy patterns, edge case failures, and bad practices across Python, R, JavaScript/TypeScript, SQL, and front-end code. Supports an optional `--dual` mode for heavier cross-model iterative review when deeper scrutiny is worth the added cost and latency. Use when users ask to "critically review my code", "critically review" code or a PR, "critique my code", "find issues in my code", "find issues" in code, ask "what's wrong with this code", ask to "review this code", "critique my PR", say "double review this", or request a "cross-model review". Scrutinizes error handling, type safety, performance, accessibility, and code quality. Provides structured feedback with severity tiers (Blocking, Required Changes, Suggestions, Noted) and specific, actionable recommendations.