Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

e2e-automation-project

Maintain a dedicated automation test project per repository - separate from the product's unit tests - with API, worker, and UI suites written scenario-first

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

Works withPlaywright
See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

E2E Automation Project

Overview

Every repository worth testing gets a dedicated automation test project: a separate project that exercises the real product through its public surface and can be re-run on every change. It is not the product's unit-test folder and never mixes into it — it has its own dependencies, its own entrypoint, and runs in the repository's own pipeline (automation-pipeline-integration).

Core principle: scenarios before code (scenario-plan-first). A suite written without a scenario list tests whatever was easy, not what matters. And automation follows the manual pass: you automate the scenarios you have already executed and understood by hand.

Structure

One automation project per repository, following the project's convention — default qa-automation/ at the repo root (a sibling repo also works):

qa-automation/
  scenarios/        # the human-readable scenario lists, one file per feature
  api/              # backend API suite: HTTP client + assertions
  worker/           # async job suite: trigger → poll → assert side effects
  ui/               # frontend suite: Playwright against the built app
  fixtures/         # seed data
  support/          # helpers, page objects, request builders, stub mappings
  scripts/e2e.sh    # single entrypoint: provision, run all suites, teardown
SurfaceTool (follow the project's existing choice)
REST APIthe language's HTTP test client + assertions (Playwright APIRequest, RestAssured, supertest, Go net/http + testify)
Worker / async jobssame test runner; triggers through the product path, polls for side effects (worker-job-testing)
Web UIPlaywright (preferred) / Cypress — headless Chromium via executablePath: process.env.CHROME_BIN, no browser download

Mobile automation is out of scope for now — do not scaffold a mobile suite.

Determinism

  • The app under test boots from the current branch build; the suite never targets stage, prod, or any shared environment.
  • Database and infra are disposable containers seeded per run (test-database-seeding, Testcontainers or the project's equivalent).
  • External services are stubbed and asserted on (test-doubles-wiremock).
  • Each test seeds and cleans its own data; no ordering dependencies; re-running gives the same result.

The Workflow

  1. Author scenarios first for the feature: happy path, boundary, negative, auth/permission, key regressions — committed under scenarios/ and posted on the task.
  2. Stand up the environment through the entrypoint script, never by hand-managed local state.
  3. Implement one test per scenario, named for the behavior (export_forbidden_for_other_tenant), reading like the scenario via page objects / request helpers.
  4. Run the whole suite, read the output, capture failure artifacts (screenshots, traces, logs) as evidence.
  5. Wire it into the pipeline if not already (automation-pipeline-integration) — a suite outside the pipeline enforces nothing.

Worked Example

Feature: task export to CSV.

  • Scenarios: (1) export returns the project's tasks; (2) empty project → header-only CSV; (3) other tenant → 403; (4) export completion event is produced by the worker.
  • Environment: app against a Testcontainers Postgres seeded with a known project; auth provider stubbed with WireMock.
  • Tests: api/export_returns_all_tasks, api/export_empty_project_header_only, api/export_forbidden_for_other_tenant, worker/export_event_emitted. Each seeds its own rows, asserts, cleans up.
  • scripts/e2e.sh → all green; pipeline runs the same script on the next task.

Common Mistakes

  • Mixing automation into the product's unit-test folders — separate project, separate dependencies.
  • A second automation project forked for the same product — extend the existing one.
  • Suites that hit staging/shared data → flaky, order-dependent, forbidden.
  • A scenario in the plan with no implementing test, or tests with no scenario.

Red Flags

  • The suite passes locally but fails in a clean environment → hidden shared state.
  • Re-running gives different results → nondeterminism to fix before anything else.
  • UI tests download a browser at run time → use the system Chromium via CHROME_BIN.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

Use when the diff adds or changes an endpoint, resolver, RPC, job or query that takes an object id, a role check, a request binding or a tenant filter - BOLA/IDOR, function-level authorization, mass assignment and tenant scoping

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

Use on every UI change - semantic HTML, labels for controls, keyboard-navigable dialogs/menus, visible focus, and never color as the only signal

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

Use when a task changes any screen, form, dialog, menu or control - Lighthouse/axe scan of the changed screens, a keyboard walk, and the thresholds that fail a task

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

Use when the repository keeps its alerting in code, or a person asks for alerts outside TaskTrooper - PrometheusRule YAML, a Cloud Monitoring alert policy in Terraform, a Datadog monitor, each routed to TaskTrooper's alert ingest URL so it opens an incident here

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

makifbaysal/tasktrooper118Updated Oct 21, 2026

See all skills by makifbaysal

Report a problem with this skill