Results for “quality-audit”

Prepare ISO 13485:2016 certification documentation for medical device Quality Management Systems, including gap analysis, template-based document creation, and compliance checklists.

Audits type safety documentation against the live codebase and fixes errors, gaps, or stale information to keep docs authoritative.

Systematically QA test a web application and fix bugs found. Runs QA testing, then iteratively fixes bugs in source code, committing each fix atomically and re-verifying. Use when asked to "qa", "QA", "test this site", "find bugs", "test and fix", or "fix what's broken". Proactively suggest when the user says a feature is ready for testing or asks "does this work?". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high only), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and a ship-readiness summary. For report-only mode, use /qa-only. (gstack) Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "quality check", "test the app", "run QA".

Build and review high-quality technical documentation, including agent instruction files and contributor-governance files, with support for audits, multilingual parity, and sub-agent orchestration.

Routes compliance requests to the appropriate regulatory and quality-management skill among 15 bundled options, covering ISO 13485, EU MDR, FDA submissions, ISO 14971, CAPA, document control, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, EU AI Act, GDPR, SOC 2, and auditing.

Produces a human-readable, progressive-disclosure overview of unfamiliar code or a pull request's changes — why it exists (the real problem it solves or goal it serves for the business or a user), and from there what it does, how it flows, and where to start — so you can get up to speed before working on or reviewing it. Use when you want to understand, get oriented in, make sense of, explain, or get up to speed on a chunk of code, a file, a directory, a symbol, or a PR's changes. Writes the overview to a scratch file and changes no code. Does not review code quality or raise findings — use code-review for auditing changes or post-code-review-to-pr for posting them. Does not produce durable feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not assess architecture or structural risk — use architectural-analysis. Does not diagnose bugs or root-cause failures — use investigate. Does not pace a person through the code one step at a time in conversation — use code-walkthrough.