# Kb QA > Run QA / audit / coverage checks on the published knowledge base or pre-save candidates, producing a report and Review-Queue proposals. Use when the user says "run a KB QA / audit coverage / spot-check evidence / run the Q-chain / check for concept pollution". Semantic-health words (L4, contradiction, Q2 added value) belong to wiki-lint-semantic and must not be hijacked here. - Skill: `iabstergo1/kb-qa` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add iabstergo1/kb-qa` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/iabstergo1/kb-qa/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Security - Author: Iabstergo1 (https://skillmd.com/u/iabstergo1) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/iabstergo1/kb-qa --- # kb-qa — post-publish / pre-save QA report Run broad QA over the published vault or a pre-save candidate: coverage, evidence spot-checks, formula screenshot spot-checks, concept pollution, an ljg-qa-style Q-chain. Produces a report and Review-Queue proposals only; it does not edit content pages. ## 1. Triggers / Non-triggers - **Triggers:** "run a KB QA", "audit coverage", "spot-check evidence", "run the Q-chain", "check for concept pollution", "pre-save QA". - **Non-triggers:** "semantic health check", "find contradictions", "does the comparison cover the key dimensions", "Q2 added value" belong to `wiki-lint-semantic`; handling an existing Review-Queue uses `kb-review`; read-only Q&A uses `kb-query`; a new source uses `ingest`. kb-qa and `wiki-lint-semantic` are **mutually exclusive** on triggers. ## 2. Inputs - Scope: whole vault, a domain, a source, a query-session, or a proposed write candidate. - Read: `wiki/index.generated.md`, `wiki/concepts/_registry.yaml`, and the relevant source/concept/topic/comparison/synthesis/lesson pages. - May read: `pipeline-workspace/query-sessions//`, `wiki/Review-Queue/`, the deterministic `lint` result. ## 3. Outputs - `pipeline-workspace/reports/kb-qa/.md`: the QA report. - For actionable findings, write `wiki/Review-Queue/kb-qa-.md` proposals; no direct content-page edits. - The report covers scope, the Q-chain, sampled items, findings, risk level, and the suggested follow-up skill (usually `kb-review`). - For an actionable finding on an `adopted/published` legacy page, distinguish the later `revise-adopted` **write authorization** from content attribution: record official evidence for the finding, but do not add a book to `source_refs` or claim that the legacy page has acquired a source. ## 4. Dependencies - CLI: `python scripts/pipeline.py status`; if needed `python scripts/pipeline.py lint --source `. `revise-adopted` belongs to the confirmed-fix path in `kb-review`, never to this read-only QA run. - Protocols: `docs/skill-runtime/schema.md`, `save-back-policy.md`, `concept-resolution.md`. - Triggers mutually exclusive with `wiki-lint-semantic`: semantic-health words are not handled here. ## 5. Persisted artifacts - `pipeline-workspace/reports/kb-qa/.md`. - `wiki/Review-Queue/kb-qa-.md` (only when an actionable finding exists). - The spot-check list: sampled pages, evidence refs, and Q-chain conclusions recorded in the report. ## 6. CLI commands ```text python scripts/pipeline.py status python scripts/pipeline.py lint --source ``` This skill never promotes, rolls back, or edits content pages; fixes go to `kb-review` or the matching write skill. If the finding targets an adopted legacy page, the handoff must say that `revise-adopted` can authorize the later edit but cannot validate the evidence or change `source_refs`. ## 7. Workflow | Sub-unit | Input | Output | Acceptance | Persisted | Failure stop | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | QA1 scope | request + index | scope and samples | does not hijack wiki-lint-semantic triggers | report draft | scope unclear | | QA2 status background | source/status/lint | deterministic background | does not re-implement deterministic lint | report | lint already blocked | | QA3 Q-chain | in-scope material | question→evidence→judgement→action | every Q has an evidence path | report | evidence thin | | QA4 spot-check | page/formula/evidence samples | spot-check results | samples and conclusions traceable | report | sample missing | | QA5 file findings | actionable findings | Review-Queue proposal | no content-page edits | kb-qa proposal | duplicate proposal | ### Evidence discipline (two rules that cost real rework when broken) **A "not in the source" verdict requires an exhaustive search, and the search must be shown.** Before writing that a term/number/mechanism is absent, search the source for the Chinese rendering, the English name, the abbreviation, and case/hyphen variants — then **record every search term** in the finding. A `single-language search` is the documented way this goes wrong: an audit once declared a bilingual term "not mentioned" after searching only its English form, while the book used the Chinese form several times. The cost is asymmetric — a missed finding leaves one clause unfixed, but a **false** finding triggers a rewrite of a correct page, and every rewrite is a fresh chance to introduce an error. **Normalize five PDF extraction deformations before you conclude a term is absent.** A page's word can be verbatim in the source yet fail a naive string search because the extracted `source.md` mangled it. One audit hit the first three at once (**20 false "not in source" candidates**), then the full page-by-page read surfaced two more — each of which, if believed, would have rewritten a correct page. Apply all five before the search, not after: 1. **Ligatures** — the PDF stores `ffi`/`ff`/`fi`/`fl` (single code points, e.g. U+FB03) so `Efficiency` is `Efficiency`, `Parameter-Efficient` is `Parameter-Efficient`. Expand ligatures to their ASCII letters. 2. **Line-break hyphenation** — a word split across a line break keeps its hyphen: `Accurately` becomes `Ac-`⏎`curately`, `Prefixes` becomes `Pre-`⏎`fixes`. Rejoin `-`⏎ before searching. 3. **CJK–Latin spacing** — the extractor inserts a space between CJK and Latin runs, so `Encoder-only架构` is stored as `Encoder-only 架构`. Collapse all whitespace (this also covers the plain Chinese/English/abbreviation/case/hyphen variants above). 4. **Thousands separator** — the page writes `1000` but the source prints the grouped form `1,000` (ROME's "1000 条知识" is `1,000` in the source). Strip `,` from digit runs before matching numbers. 5. **Chinese numerals** — the page writes an Arabic digit but the source uses the Chinese numeral (T5's "连续 3 个" is `连续三个` in the source). Try the 一/二/三… form of any small integer. Record the normalized form you searched, not just the raw term. **A sampling PASS is not a clean bill for the page.** When you spot-check assertions rather than reading the page whole, the verdict covers **only the assertions actually sampled** — say so in the report, and later rounds must **never inherit** it as evidence that the page is clean. Three consecutive rounds on one source overturned pages that an earlier sampling round had marked clean; only an integral, per-assertion pass supports a page-level conclusion. ## 8. Failure stops / recovery vault/index missing; scope unclear; the request is really a semantic-health check (switch to `wiki-lint-semantic`); deterministic lint already failed with no stable QA scope; an evidence path is missing; the user asks to edit content pages directly (switch to `kb-review` and wait for confirmation); an adopted-page finding has no official evidence strong enough to support the proposed correction. **Recovery:** the report + proposals are the durable output; re-run after the scope is clarified. ## 9. Acceptance criteria - The QA report is written under `pipeline-workspace/reports/kb-qa/`. - Every Q-chain item has a question, evidence, judgement, and a follow-up action. - Actionable findings are written as Review-Queue proposals. - Adopted legacy findings separate “evidence supports this correction” from “the pipeline authorizes a later write”; no new `source_refs` are inferred from a citation or from `revise-adopted`. - No wiki content page was edited directly. - None of `wiki-lint-semantic`'s exclusive triggers were handled.