From code-foundations
Applies Code Complete's QA process design: selects defect-detection techniques by phase, sizes test suites, designs review and inspection processes. For QA planning, not debugging.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/code-foundations:cc-quality-practicesThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Improving quality reduces development cost. No single defect-detection technique exceeds ~75% effectiveness, so combine techniques — combining nearly doubles detection rates. Mature suites run about 5 dirty tests (error paths, bad data, edge cases) for every 1 clean test (happy path).
Improving quality reduces development cost. No single defect-detection technique exceeds ~75% effectiveness, so combine techniques — combining nearly doubles detection rates. Mature suites run about 5 dirty tests (error paths, bad data, edge cases) for every 1 clean test (happy path).
For active bug diagnosis (an actual failing test or repro to chase down), hand off: Skill(code-foundations:cc-debugging). This skill is for QA planning and process design.
Shared CC vocabulary and thresholds (cohesion spectrum, coupling, key metrics): Read(${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/cc-foundations.md).
Internal quality enables external quality: poor maintainability blocks fixing defects, which degrades reliability.
| Technique | Rate | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Formal inspection | 45–70% | Roles, checklists, preparation. Preparation finds ~90% of the defects; the meeting adds ~10% [Votta 1991]. |
| Pair programming | 40–60% | Real-time review during development. |
| Walk-through | 20–40% | Author-led, less structured. |
| Code reading | 20–35% | Individual review emphasizing preparation. |
| Unit testing | 15–50% | Developer tests of individual components. |
Execute the quality, review, and testing checklists against the code or process. Checklists:
Read(${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/checklists/qa-and-testing.md) — QA plan, inspections, test cases, data-flow.Read(${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/checklists/debugging.md) — finding, fixing, brute-force, general approach.Output one row per item: | Item | Status | Evidence | Location |, status ∈ VIOLATION (fails item) / WARNING (partial) / PASS.
Produce test cases, review procedures, and quality plans.
Test-case generation (output: test-case list):
1 + count(if/while/for/and/or) + case branches (add 1 if no default case).| Need | Method |
|---|---|
| Highest defect detection (45–70%) | Formal inspection (default) |
| Team geographically dispersed | Code reading (individual prep, async-friendly) |
| Schedule pressure + quality | Pair programming |
| Diverse viewpoints, larger group | Walk-through |
Inspection roles and meeting mechanics apply when designing a review process for a human team (not for solo or agent work):
| After | Next |
|---|---|
| Defect to fix found | Skill(code-foundations:cc-refactoring-guidance) |
| Design issues found | Skill(code-foundations:cc-routine-and-class-design) |
| Active bug to diagnose | Skill(code-foundations:cc-debugging) |
npx claudepluginhub ryanthedev/code-foundationsGuides Verification (tests, reviews) vs Validation (user acceptance) for CMMI Level 3 SDLC quality. Use for test strategy, code reviews, shipping without tests, defect management.
Reviews existing test suites for structural quality problems (brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability) drawing on classic engineering books.
Expert approach to defect-prevention in quality measurement. Use when working with .