skill · foundations
QA foundations
A six-week, ten-step path. By the end of it you have written a Gherkin set the team defends, run an exploratory pass that found what Gherkin didn't, signed a safe-to-ship paragraph for a real release, and read the signal next to your scenarios. You are not a senior QA. You are a QA whose first cycle protected one moment.
TIP
A skill is read → practice → check → reflect, anchored to your real cycle. Bring a real story from your sprint.
Mastery looks like
When you finish this path, you can:
- Hold a 45-minute amigos that produces three scenarios with a negative case.
- Run an exploratory pass that finds at least one thing Gherkin didn't anticipate.
- Write a three-sentence safe to ship paragraph, signed.
- Refuse to sign a brief whose negative case you couldn't write.
- Read a signal reading and identify the Gherkin gap.
Self-rating before you start
| 1 — Never | 3 — Sometimes | 5 — Default | |
|---|---|---|---|
| I sit at amigos every story | |||
| Every Gherkin set has a negative case | |||
| I run an exploratory pass before release | |||
| I write the safe to ship paragraph | |||
| I have refused a release without it being personal |
Step 1 — Orient in the chain
Read: What We Shape · Amigos & Gherkin · As We Build · Testing Layers · The Map.
Practice prompt: in three sentences, explain the difference between a test green for the right reason and a test green for the wrong reason.
Step 2 — Read the team's last Gherkin sets
Practice prompt: open the last three Gherkin sets the team produced. For each: does it test the moment or the implementation? Does it include a negative case? Could the developer fake it with a one-line hack?
Output: a one-page note per set — protects the moment · drifted · rubber-stamp.
Step 3 — Sit silent at amigos
Read: What We Shape · Amigos & Gherkin.
Practice prompt: attend two amigos sessions, silent the first, contributing the second. Bring at least one anti-flow ("what if the person does X instead?") to the second.
Step 4 — Write your first Gherkin set
Practice prompt: for the next story, hold amigos with the PO and the developer. Write three scenarios, including at least one negative case and one accessibility consideration.
Mini-check: read the Given line of each scenario. Does it name the person's situation, or the system state? Rewrite for the person.
Step 5 — Refuse a brief honestly
Practice prompt: find a brief in flight that lacks a negative case. Try to write the negative-case scenario. If you can't, surface it to the trio — I can't sign this until I can write the negative case.
Pair task: ask the PO: what would surprise us if it happened in the first 48 hours? — work that into Gherkin.
Step 6 — Run an exploratory pass
Read: As We Build · Release Gate.
Practice prompt: when the next feature lands behind flag in staging, run the exploratory pass. Try the things Gherkin didn't say. Note keyboard-only flows and screen reader paths.
Output: a one-page exploratory report — what was tried, what was found, what the team should know.
Step 7 — Sign or refuse the release
Practice prompt: with the trio, hold the pre-release conversation. Write the paragraph: this is safe · safe under flag · not safe. Sign it.
Mini-check: if your paragraph is three sentences and a feeling, rewrite. The risk you name should be specific enough that the team can mitigate it.
Step 8 — Watch the first 48 hours
Read: After We Build · The First 48 Hours.
Practice prompt: when the change ships, watch what your Gherkin set covered. Did the negative case ever fire? Did the accessibility consideration hold? Take notes.
Step 9 — Read the signal next to the prediction
Read: After We Build · Signal & The Prediction · After We Build · Bugs and Their Roots.
Practice prompt: when the signal reading lands, compare it against your Gherkin set. Where was the gap? Bring at least one item to next amigos.
Step 10 — Teach back, contribute back
Practice prompt: write a one-page guide for the next new QA joining your team. What I wish I'd known before my first cycle. One page.
Authoring contribution: open a PR — sharpen one thing in the corpus about Gherkin discipline or exploratory craft.
Self-rating after: rate yourself again. Bring the gap to your next cycle.
After this path
- QA · Practitioner (coming) — multi-story scope, accessibility leadership, mentoring at amigos.
- QA · Advanced (coming) — quality strategy across the studio.
Stuck?
| If you got stuck at | Read |
|---|---|
| Step 3 — couldn't think of an anti-flow | Amigos · When amigos surfaces a problem |
| Step 4 — Gherkin felt like testing the implementation | Rewrite Given lines for the person, not the system |
| Step 6 — exploratory pass produced nothing | You tested what Gherkin said. Try what it didn't. |
| Step 7 — couldn't write a defensible not safe | The risk isn't named specifically. Push for specificity. |