Test Scope Analysis
Analyze goals, product surface, changes/risks, constraints, existing assets, platforms, roles, data, and environments before testing. Produce TS-## inclusion/exclusion, depth, dependencies, stop conditions, expansion triggers, and residual risk. This is not a full test strategy, test selection, or test execution.
When to Use
- Use it to define explainable boundaries for an iteration, release, change, or risk review.
- Use it to make core journeys, direct/transitive impact, non-functional scope, migration compatibility, and unassessed areas explicit.
- Use it when context is incomplete but a bounded scope draft and evidence questions are useful.
Do not use it to execute tests, generate a complete strategy, or claim full coverage/zero risk without evidence.
Output Format Options
- Use Markdown by default; when a table, CSV, or JSON is requested, preserve the same evidence, status, impact, owner, and validation fields.
- Do not present a structured format or static inventory as execution, pass, approval, or release evidence.
How to Use
- Read this Skill's primary prompt and provide the objective, scope, material, environment, and available evidence.
- Follow the prompt's input audit and output contract; deliver a bounded first pass when information is incomplete.
- Retain source, evidence status, impact, owner role, close condition, and validation method for every finding.
Workflow
- Read
prompts/test-scope-analysis.mdand audit objective, version, scope, risk, and constraints. - Classify input as
known,missing,conflicting,stale,out_of_scope, andassumptions. - Record inclusion, exclusion, depth, dependencies, stop conditions, expansion triggers, evidence, and owner role in
TS-##entries. - Separate scope facts, risk inferences, recommendations, and Human decisions; give a verifiable reason for every tradeoff.
- Deliver a bounded scope and expansion criteria when context is missing; never upgrade a scope statement into coverage proof.
Core Constraints
- Do not generate a full test strategy, choose a concrete executable set, or execute tests.
- Do not use changed-file names, test names, scope tables, or static checks as coverage/pass evidence.
- Each
TS-##includes goal/object, included, excluded, rationale, depth, platform/role/data/environment dependencies, stop conditions, expansion triggers, residual risk, source, and owner. - Without risk, execution, or environment evidence, mark status
unassessed,unverified, orunexecuted.
Reference Files
- Always read
prompts/test-scope-analysis.mdbefore producing an analysis. - For regression, read
evals/eval.yamland its cases; a scope draft does not prove testing ran. - For trigger checks, use
evals/trigger-prompts.csvandevals/local-rules.json; missing selection trace isBLOCKED.
Best Practices
- Prioritize high-impact gaps with a verifiable next action, using the smallest useful experiment or evidence request.
- Separate facts, evidence-backed inferences, recommendations, and Human decisions; never upgrade an assumption into a conclusion.
Delivery Checklist
- Record objective, version, scope, and six-part input audit.
- Give every
TS-##inclusion/exclusion, depth, dependencies, stop, and expansion conditions. - Cover core/transitive impact, non-functional, migration compatibility, and unassessed areas.
- Give each tradeoff source, impact, and validation method.
- Do not present a bounded scope as coverage proof, execution evidence, or release conclusion.
Common Pitfalls
- Treating “test only the core flow” as proof that non-core paths are safe.
- Replacing scope rationale and risk evidence with test or file counts.
- Having no expansion trigger when change or risk evidence evolves.