Audit this interface against the supplied interaction and markup. Check semantics, heading order, keyboard operation, focus visibility, accessible names, form errors, contrast assumptions, zoom, motion and screen-reader announcements. Do not infer compliance from a screenshot alone. Mark what needs browser or assistive-technology testing. Markup: [HTML OR COMPONENT]. Styles: [CSS]. Interaction: [USER FLOW].
Customize: HTML OR COMPONENT, CSS, USER FLOW
Create a risk-based QA plan for this change. Map each requirement to a test, then cover integration boundaries, permissions, failure recovery, concurrency, data migration, observability and rollback. Prioritize by impact and likelihood. Product change: [CHANGE]. Requirements: [REQUIREMENTS]. Architecture: [ARCHITECTURE]. Known incidents: [INCIDENTS OR NONE].
Customize: CHANGE, REQUIREMENTS, ARCHITECTURE, INCIDENTS OR NONE
Evaluate this regular expression as production input validation. Explain what it accepts, then design positive, negative and adversarial test cases. Include empty input, Unicode, extreme length, ambiguous boundaries and likely ReDoS cases. Do not claim the expression is safe unless the evidence supports it. Regex: [REGEX]. Intended rule: [RULE]. Engine: [ENGINE].
Customize: REGEX, RULE, ENGINE
Diagnose this bug using only the supplied evidence. Build a timeline, separate observations from hypotheses, rank the likely causes, and propose the cheapest discriminating test for each hypothesis. Do not propose a code change until one cause is supported. Symptom: [SYMPTOM]. Logs: [LOGS]. Recent changes: [CHANGES]. Environment: [ENVIRONMENT]. Reproduction: [STEPS].
Customize: SYMPTOM, LOGS, CHANGES, ENVIRONMENT, STEPS
You are reviewing an unfamiliar codebase. Explain the supplied code before proposing changes. Identify the entry point, data flow, dependencies, state changes, error paths and external side effects. Separate facts visible in the code from assumptions. Then list the three highest-risk areas to inspect next. Code: [PASTE CODE]. Runtime and version: [RUNTIME]. Known behaviour: [KNOWN BEHAVIOUR].
Customize: PASTE CODE, RUNTIME, KNOWN BEHAVIOUR
Review this change against the stated requirements. Report only issues introduced or exposed by the patch. For each issue, give severity, exact file and line, the failure scenario, and the smallest safe correction. Do not report style preferences unless they cause a defect. Requirements: [REQUIREMENTS]. Patch: [DIFF]. Relevant tests: [TESTS].
Customize: REQUIREMENTS, DIFF, TESTS
Review this SQL query using the supplied schema and expected result. Check join cardinality, null handling, duplicate rows, filtering order, transaction assumptions, injection risk and index use. Propose a corrected query only when needed, and explain how to verify it with EXPLAIN or the database equivalent. Database: [DATABASE AND VERSION]. Schema: [SCHEMA]. Query: [QUERY]. Expected result: [EXPECTED RESULT].
Customize: DATABASE AND VERSION, SCHEMA, QUERY, EXPECTED RESULT
Convert this feature request into an architecture decision record. State the problem, constraints, quality attributes, two or three viable options, trade-offs, security implications, operational cost and a reversible recommendation. Mark missing evidence as unknown. Feature: [FEATURE]. Existing system: [SYSTEM]. Constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]. Expected scale: [SCALE].
Customize: FEATURE, SYSTEM, CONSTRAINTS, SCALE