本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

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

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

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.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when deciding whether a request needs an analiz task before implementation - the conditions that require the architect's analysis versus going straight to implementation

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

makifbaysal のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する