본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

replay-user-flows

Turn a user journey you just clicked through into a saved regression check that re-runs deterministically, with no model in the loop and no test code to write. Use when you have driven the same flow twice, when the user wants regression coverage without a Playwright suite, when a refactor needs proving against every existing journey, or when re-verifying by hand is costing a full drive every time.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

연동 도구Playwright
설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md5.7 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Record a journey once, re-verify it forever

Exploring an app to find a journey is the expensive part, and re-driving it with a model pays that cost again on every change. Reticle flows pay it once: the journey is saved with semantic anchors and replayed deterministically afterwards.

Needs Reticle wired in the project. Not there? RETICLE_INSTALL_SOURCE=npx_skill npx @reticlehq/server@latest init, then the install-and-verify skill.

Record

You do not have to ask. A drive is saved as a flow automatically when the session ends, written to .reticle/flows/. Commit it: any agent on the repo can then replay it.

What decides whether it is worth committing is how you drove it. A step keeps a consequence only when you declared one, so drive the golden path like this:

reticle_act_and_wait({ sessionId, ref, action: "click", until: { kind: "signal", name: "task:created" } })

That step replays as a test. A bare reticle_act saves a click with nothing to prove, and replays green through any regression.

To name a flow deliberately rather than take the automatic one, reticle_record and reticle_flow_save do it through reticle_run { tool, args }. Neither is advertised, and neither needs to be: reticle_run is on the default surface and dispatches to any registered tool by name. RETICLE_ADVERTISE_ALL_TOOLS=1 advertises them outright instead, which suits a suite that calls by name rather than a running agent.

Annotate the business outcome, not just the clicks, so a replay proves the journey achieved something. Extended surface, like the two above:

reticle_run({ tool: "reticle_annotate", sessionId, args: { flow: "create-task", kind: "intent", text: "create a task and see it in the list" } })
reticle_run({ tool: "reticle_annotate", sessionId, args: { flow: "create-task", kind: "success-state", signal: "task:created" } })

You do not need to add data-testid first. A step whose element has no testid is anchored on its component and source location automatically, and a testid-preserving refactor still replays green.

Replay

reticle_verify({ sessionId, action: "change", files: ["src/tasks/TaskList.tsx"] })

That replays the flows covering those files. To replay one named flow directly, reticle_flow_replay is reached through reticle_run.

Three statuses, and the failures are legible rather than blind:

statusmeansnext
okevery anchor resolved, every expectation helddone
driftan anchor missed: a renamed testid, a signal that never firedread decision.nextAction; it names the file:line and the closest surviving anchor
errorthe flow file is missing or invalid, or a step failed at runtimefix from the error envelope's failed step

On drift, reticle_verify { action: "heal" } proposes the nearest-match rebind so flows do not rot. Apply it when the rename was intentional; treat it as a finding when it was not.

Re-verify the whole suite after any change

reticle_verify({ sessionId, action: "flows" })
// → { status, total, passed, failed, failures: [{ flow, verdict, whatChanged, whereInSource, nextAction }] }

One call, every saved flow, no model per flow. Only failures carry detail, so a green suite is cheap to check. Build → flow_verify → fix from each nextAction → repeat is the regression loop, and it is the point of recording in the first place.

Only the flows your change could have broken

On a large suite, replaying everything after a one-file edit is waste. Hand it the diff instead:

reticle_verify({ sessionId, action: "change", since: "HEAD~1" })

It works out which saved flows cover the files you edited and replays only those. Give it a git ref or the file list. Use this in the inner loop and flow_verify before you ship: the narrow one is fast, the whole one is the guarantee.

Which of your flows actually prove anything

reticle_run({ tool: "reticle_domain", sessionId })   // not advertised, one hop away
// → { flowCount, coverage: { asserted, presenceOnly, assertionFree }, gaps: { declaredUntestedSignals, … } }

A recorded flow that asserts nothing replays green through any regression: it proves the clicks still resolve, not that the app still works. Check this after a recording session: anything landing in assertionFree needs an annotate pass with a success-state, or it is decoration.

When NOT to record

A journey you will run once is cheaper to drive with reticle_act_and_wait and forget. Record the flows that define the product (the ones a regression in would be a bad day) and leave exploratory drives unsaved. A suite of forty half-meant flows costs more attention than it returns.

Honesty

A replay reports what happened. drift is not a pass, and healing a flow to make it green when the app genuinely broke is the one thing that makes the whole suite worthless. If the rename was not intentional, the drift is the finding: report it with the whereInSource pointer.


Full flow reference, one page: curl https://docs.reticle.sh/flows.md. Index of everything: curl https://docs.reticle.sh/llms.txt.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Test-driven development for behaviour a unit test cannot reach, by writing the expectation against the running app before writing the code. Declare the consequence first, watch it fail, implement, watch it pass. Use when building a user-facing feature, when the user asks for TDD on UI or full-stack work, when a unit test cannot express the outcome that matters, or when you want a red-green loop that runs against the real app instead of mocks.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Sweep a whole running web app for what is broken, without writing a script or knowing the codebase. Clicks every reachable control and reports dead buttons, console errors, failed requests, and places where the API and the screen disagree. Use on an unfamiliar codebase, before a release, after a big merge or dependency bump, when the user asks for a smoke test or a health check, or when someone says "just check everything still works".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Find out why something in a running web app does not work, when the console is empty and the code looks correct. Reads the click, the request, the store and the console together and returns the file:line to open. Use when a button does nothing, a form will not submit, data will not load, a page renders blank or stale, a modal will not close, or the user says "it's broken" and the code review says it is fine.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Check that the UI you actually rendered uses the design system, by reading computed styles in the running app against the project's design tokens. Catches hardcoded hex colors, off-palette backgrounds, invisible or unusable controls, and animations that never ran. Use after building or restyling a component, when a design review is wanted, when a UI looks slightly off but nobody can say why, or when a design system exists and nothing checks whether the code follows it.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Drive and verify an Electron or Tauri desktop app from the inside, including the main-process and Rust IPC calls a browser tool cannot see. Use when a desktop app needs testing, when a feature works in the browser but not in the packaged app, when an IPC or invoke call needs proving, when a desktop screenshot or visual diff is wanted, or when you need a headless run of a desktop UI in CI.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Find out why the tests pass but the app is broken. Catches false greens: a green suite over a feature that does not work, a mocked API standing in for a real one, an assertion that holds no matter what the app does, a click handler wired to nothing. Use when the suite is green and the user says it is broken, when a test never fails, when coverage looks fine but bugs still ship, or before trusting a passing run you did not watch.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

reticlehq/reticle1.3천2026년 10월 21일 업데이트

reticlehq의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고