mirror of
https://github.com/R0m1k3/CollectFlow.git
synced 2026-10-23 23:18:10 +02:00
feat: Add a foundational set of BMM, BMB, TEA, and Core workflows, agent definitions, and supporting templates.
This commit is contained in:
Michael committed
commit
6a0ddd7e36
724 files changed
+110361
No files matched your search
@@ -0,0 +1,582 @@
|
||||
# Automate Workflow Validation Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist to validate that the automate workflow has been executed correctly and all deliverables meet quality standards.
|
||||
|
||||
## Prerequisites
|
||||
|
||||
Before starting this workflow, verify:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Framework scaffolding configured (playwright.config.ts or cypress.config.ts exists)
|
||||
- [ ] Test directory structure exists (tests/ folder with subdirectories)
|
||||
- [ ] Package.json has test framework dependencies installed
|
||||
|
||||
**Halt only if:** Framework scaffolding is completely missing (run `framework` workflow first)
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** BMad artifacts (story, tech-spec, PRD) are OPTIONAL - workflow can run without them
|
||||
**Note:** `automate` generates tests; it does not run `*atdd` or `*test-review`. If ATDD outputs exist, use them as input and avoid duplicate coverage.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 1: Execution Mode Determination and Context Loading
|
||||
|
||||
### Mode Detection
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Execution mode correctly determined:
|
||||
- [ ] BMad-Integrated Mode (story_file variable set) OR
|
||||
- [ ] Standalone Mode (target_feature or target_files set) OR
|
||||
- [ ] Auto-discover Mode (no targets specified)
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad Artifacts (If Available - OPTIONAL)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Story markdown loaded (if `{story_file}` provided)
|
||||
- [ ] Acceptance criteria extracted from story (if available)
|
||||
- [ ] Tech-spec.md loaded (if `{use_tech_spec}` true and file exists)
|
||||
- [ ] Test-design.md loaded (if `{use_test_design}` true and file exists)
|
||||
- [ ] PRD.md loaded (if `{use_prd}` true and file exists)
|
||||
- [ ] **Note**: Absence of BMad artifacts does NOT halt workflow
|
||||
|
||||
### Framework Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test framework config loaded (playwright.config.ts or cypress.config.ts)
|
||||
- [ ] Test directory structure identified from `{test_dir}`
|
||||
- [ ] Existing test patterns reviewed
|
||||
- [ ] Test runner capabilities noted (parallel execution, fixtures, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
### Coverage Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Existing test files searched in `{test_dir}` (if `{analyze_coverage}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Tested features vs untested features identified
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage gaps mapped (tests to source files)
|
||||
- [ ] Existing fixture and factory patterns checked
|
||||
|
||||
### Knowledge Base Fragments Loaded
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] `test-levels-framework.md` - Test level selection
|
||||
- [ ] `test-priorities.md` - Priority classification (P0-P3)
|
||||
- [ ] `fixture-architecture.md` - Fixture patterns with auto-cleanup
|
||||
- [ ] `data-factories.md` - Factory patterns using faker
|
||||
- [ ] `selective-testing.md` - Targeted test execution strategies
|
||||
- [ ] `ci-burn-in.md` - Flaky test detection patterns
|
||||
- [ ] `test-quality.md` - Test design principles
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 2: Automation Targets Identification
|
||||
|
||||
### Target Determination
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad-Integrated Mode (if story available):**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Acceptance criteria mapped to test scenarios
|
||||
- [ ] Features implemented in story identified
|
||||
- [ ] Existing ATDD tests checked (if any)
|
||||
- [ ] Expansion beyond ATDD planned (edge cases, negative paths)
|
||||
|
||||
**Standalone Mode (if no story):**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Specific feature analyzed (if `{target_feature}` specified)
|
||||
- [ ] Specific files analyzed (if `{target_files}` specified)
|
||||
- [ ] Features auto-discovered (if `{auto_discover_features}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Features prioritized by:
|
||||
- [ ] No test coverage (highest priority)
|
||||
- [ ] Complex business logic
|
||||
- [ ] External integrations (API, database, auth)
|
||||
- [ ] Critical user paths (login, checkout, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Level Selection
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test level selection framework applied (from `test-levels-framework.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] E2E tests identified: Critical user journeys, multi-system integration
|
||||
- [ ] API tests identified: Business logic, service contracts, data transformations
|
||||
- [ ] Component tests identified: UI behavior, interactions, state management
|
||||
- [ ] Unit tests identified: Pure logic, edge cases, error handling
|
||||
|
||||
### Duplicate Coverage Avoidance
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Same behavior NOT tested at multiple levels unnecessarily
|
||||
- [ ] E2E used for critical happy path only
|
||||
- [ ] API tests used for business logic variations
|
||||
- [ ] Component tests used for UI interaction edge cases
|
||||
- [ ] Unit tests used for pure logic edge cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Priority Assignment
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test priorities assigned using `test-priorities.md` framework
|
||||
- [ ] P0 tests: Critical paths, security-critical, data integrity
|
||||
- [ ] P1 tests: Important features, integration points, error handling
|
||||
- [ ] P2 tests: Edge cases, less-critical variations, performance
|
||||
- [ ] P3 tests: Nice-to-have, rarely-used features, exploratory
|
||||
- [ ] Priority variables respected:
|
||||
- [ ] `{include_p0}` = true (always include)
|
||||
- [ ] `{include_p1}` = true (high priority)
|
||||
- [ ] `{include_p2}` = true (medium priority)
|
||||
- [ ] `{include_p3}` = false (low priority, skip by default)
|
||||
|
||||
### Coverage Plan Created
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test coverage plan documented
|
||||
- [ ] What will be tested at each level listed
|
||||
- [ ] Priorities assigned to each test
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage strategy clear (critical-paths, comprehensive, or selective)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 3: Test Infrastructure Generated
|
||||
|
||||
### Fixture Architecture
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Existing fixtures checked in `tests/support/fixtures/`
|
||||
- [ ] Fixture architecture created/enhanced (if `{generate_fixtures}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] All fixtures use Playwright's `test.extend()` pattern
|
||||
- [ ] All fixtures have auto-cleanup in teardown
|
||||
- [ ] Common fixtures created/enhanced:
|
||||
- [ ] authenticatedUser (with auto-delete)
|
||||
- [ ] apiRequest (authenticated client)
|
||||
- [ ] mockNetwork (external service mocking)
|
||||
- [ ] testDatabase (with auto-cleanup)
|
||||
|
||||
### Data Factories
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Existing factories checked in `tests/support/factories/`
|
||||
- [ ] Factory architecture created/enhanced (if `{generate_factories}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] All factories use `@faker-js/faker` for random data (no hardcoded values)
|
||||
- [ ] All factories support overrides for specific scenarios
|
||||
- [ ] Common factories created/enhanced:
|
||||
- [ ] User factory (email, password, name, role)
|
||||
- [ ] Product factory (name, price, SKU)
|
||||
- [ ] Order factory (items, total, status)
|
||||
- [ ] Cleanup helpers provided (e.g., deleteUser(), deleteProduct())
|
||||
|
||||
### Helper Utilities
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Existing helpers checked in `tests/support/helpers/` (if `{update_helpers}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Common utilities created/enhanced:
|
||||
- [ ] waitFor (polling for complex conditions)
|
||||
- [ ] retry (retry helper for flaky operations)
|
||||
- [ ] testData (test data generation)
|
||||
- [ ] assertions (custom assertion helpers)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 4: Test Files Generated
|
||||
|
||||
### Test File Structure
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test files organized correctly:
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/e2e/` for E2E tests
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/api/` for API tests
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/component/` for component tests
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/unit/` for unit tests
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/support/` for fixtures/factories/helpers
|
||||
|
||||
### E2E Tests (If Applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] E2E test files created in `tests/e2e/`
|
||||
- [ ] All tests follow Given-When-Then format
|
||||
- [ ] All tests have priority tags ([P0], [P1], [P2], [P3]) in test name
|
||||
- [ ] All tests use data-testid selectors (not CSS classes)
|
||||
- [ ] One assertion per test (atomic design)
|
||||
- [ ] No hard waits or sleeps (explicit waits only)
|
||||
- [ ] Network-first pattern applied (route interception BEFORE navigation)
|
||||
- [ ] Clear Given-When-Then comments in test code
|
||||
|
||||
### API Tests (If Applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] API test files created in `tests/api/`
|
||||
- [ ] All tests follow Given-When-Then format
|
||||
- [ ] All tests have priority tags in test name
|
||||
- [ ] API contracts validated (request/response structure)
|
||||
- [ ] HTTP status codes verified
|
||||
- [ ] Response body validation includes required fields
|
||||
- [ ] Error cases tested (400, 401, 403, 404, 500)
|
||||
- [ ] JWT token format validated (if auth tests)
|
||||
|
||||
### Component Tests (If Applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Component test files created in `tests/component/`
|
||||
- [ ] All tests follow Given-When-Then format
|
||||
- [ ] All tests have priority tags in test name
|
||||
- [ ] Component mounting works correctly
|
||||
- [ ] Interaction testing covers user actions (click, hover, keyboard)
|
||||
- [ ] State management validated
|
||||
- [ ] Props and events tested
|
||||
|
||||
### Unit Tests (If Applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Unit test files created in `tests/unit/`
|
||||
- [ ] All tests follow Given-When-Then format
|
||||
- [ ] All tests have priority tags in test name
|
||||
- [ ] Pure logic tested (no dependencies)
|
||||
- [ ] Edge cases covered
|
||||
- [ ] Error handling tested
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality Standards Enforced
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All tests use Given-When-Then format with clear comments
|
||||
- [ ] All tests have descriptive names with priority tags
|
||||
- [ ] No duplicate tests (same behavior tested multiple times)
|
||||
- [ ] No flaky patterns (race conditions, timing issues)
|
||||
- [ ] No test interdependencies (tests can run in any order)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are deterministic (same input always produces same result)
|
||||
- [ ] All tests use data-testid selectors (E2E tests)
|
||||
- [ ] No hard waits: `await page.waitForTimeout()` (forbidden)
|
||||
- [ ] No conditional flow: `if (await element.isVisible())` (forbidden)
|
||||
- [ ] No try-catch for test logic (only for cleanup)
|
||||
- [ ] No hardcoded test data (use factories with faker)
|
||||
- [ ] No page object classes (tests are direct and simple)
|
||||
- [ ] No shared state between tests
|
||||
|
||||
### Network-First Pattern Applied
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Route interception set up BEFORE navigation (E2E tests with network requests)
|
||||
- [ ] `page.route()` called before `page.goto()` to prevent race conditions
|
||||
- [ ] Network-first pattern verified in all E2E tests that make API calls
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 5: Test Validation and Healing (NEW - Phase 2.5)
|
||||
|
||||
### Healing Configuration
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Healing configuration checked:
|
||||
- [ ] `{auto_validate}` setting noted (default: true)
|
||||
- [ ] `{auto_heal_failures}` setting noted (default: false)
|
||||
- [ ] `{max_healing_iterations}` setting noted (default: 3)
|
||||
- [ ] `{use_mcp_healing}` setting noted (default: true)
|
||||
|
||||
### Healing Knowledge Fragments Loaded (If Healing Enabled)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] `test-healing-patterns.md` loaded (common failure patterns and fixes)
|
||||
- [ ] `selector-resilience.md` loaded (selector refactoring guide)
|
||||
- [ ] `timing-debugging.md` loaded (race condition fixes)
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Execution and Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Generated tests executed (if `{auto_validate}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Test results captured:
|
||||
- [ ] Total tests run
|
||||
- [ ] Passing tests count
|
||||
- [ ] Failing tests count
|
||||
- [ ] Error messages and stack traces captured
|
||||
|
||||
### Healing Loop (If Enabled and Tests Failed)
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Healing loop entered (if `{auto_heal_failures}` true AND tests failed)
|
||||
- [ ] For each failing test:
|
||||
- [ ] Failure pattern identified (selector, timing, data, network, hard wait)
|
||||
- [ ] Appropriate healing strategy applied:
|
||||
- [ ] Stale selector → Replaced with data-testid or ARIA role
|
||||
- [ ] Race condition → Added network-first interception or state waits
|
||||
- [ ] Dynamic data → Replaced hardcoded values with regex/dynamic generation
|
||||
- [ ] Network error → Added route mocking
|
||||
- [ ] Hard wait → Replaced with event-based wait
|
||||
- [ ] Healed test re-run to validate fix
|
||||
- [ ] Iteration count tracked (max 3 attempts)
|
||||
|
||||
### Unfixable Tests Handling
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Tests that couldn't be healed after 3 iterations marked with `test.fixme()` (if `{mark_unhealable_as_fixme}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Detailed comment added to test.fixme() tests:
|
||||
- [ ] What failure occurred
|
||||
- [ ] What healing was attempted (3 iterations)
|
||||
- [ ] Why healing failed
|
||||
- [ ] Manual investigation steps needed
|
||||
- [ ] Original test logic preserved in comments
|
||||
|
||||
### Healing Report Generated
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Healing report generated (if healing attempted)
|
||||
- [ ] Report includes:
|
||||
- [ ] Auto-heal enabled status
|
||||
- [ ] Healing mode (MCP-assisted or Pattern-based)
|
||||
- [ ] Iterations allowed (max_healing_iterations)
|
||||
- [ ] Validation results (total, passing, failing)
|
||||
- [ ] Successfully healed tests (count, file:line, fix applied)
|
||||
- [ ] Unable to heal tests (count, file:line, reason)
|
||||
- [ ] Healing patterns applied (selector fixes, timing fixes, data fixes)
|
||||
- [ ] Knowledge base references used
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 6: Documentation and Scripts Updated
|
||||
|
||||
### Test README Updated
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] `tests/README.md` created or updated (if `{update_readme}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Test suite structure overview included
|
||||
- [ ] Test execution instructions provided (all, specific files, by priority)
|
||||
- [ ] Fixture usage examples provided
|
||||
- [ ] Factory usage examples provided
|
||||
- [ ] Priority tagging convention explained ([P0], [P1], [P2], [P3])
|
||||
- [ ] How to write new tests documented
|
||||
- [ ] Common patterns documented
|
||||
- [ ] Anti-patterns documented (what to avoid)
|
||||
|
||||
### package.json Scripts Updated
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] package.json scripts added/updated (if `{update_package_scripts}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] `test:e2e` script for all E2E tests
|
||||
- [ ] `test:e2e:p0` script for P0 tests only
|
||||
- [ ] `test:e2e:p1` script for P0 + P1 tests
|
||||
- [ ] `test:api` script for API tests
|
||||
- [ ] `test:component` script for component tests
|
||||
- [ ] `test:unit` script for unit tests (if applicable)
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Suite Executed
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test suite run locally (if `{run_tests_after_generation}` true)
|
||||
- [ ] Test results captured (passing/failing counts)
|
||||
- [ ] No flaky patterns detected (tests are deterministic)
|
||||
- [ ] Setup requirements documented (if any)
|
||||
- [ ] Known issues documented (if any)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Step 6: Automation Summary Generated
|
||||
|
||||
### Automation Summary Document
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Output file created at `{output_summary}`
|
||||
- [ ] Document includes execution mode (BMad-Integrated, Standalone, Auto-discover)
|
||||
- [ ] Feature analysis included (source files, coverage gaps) - Standalone mode
|
||||
- [ ] Tests created listed (E2E, API, Component, Unit) with counts and paths
|
||||
- [ ] Infrastructure created listed (fixtures, factories, helpers)
|
||||
- [ ] Test execution instructions provided
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage analysis included:
|
||||
- [ ] Total test count
|
||||
- [ ] Priority breakdown (P0, P1, P2, P3 counts)
|
||||
- [ ] Test level breakdown (E2E, API, Component, Unit counts)
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage percentage (if calculated)
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage status (acceptance criteria covered, gaps identified)
|
||||
- [ ] Definition of Done checklist included
|
||||
- [ ] Next steps provided
|
||||
- [ ] Recommendations included (if Standalone mode)
|
||||
|
||||
### Summary Provided to User
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Concise summary output provided
|
||||
- [ ] Total tests created across test levels
|
||||
- [ ] Priority breakdown (P0, P1, P2, P3 counts)
|
||||
- [ ] Infrastructure counts (fixtures, factories, helpers)
|
||||
- [ ] Test execution command provided
|
||||
- [ ] Output file path provided
|
||||
- [ ] Next steps listed
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
### Test Design Quality
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are readable (clear Given-When-Then structure)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are maintainable (use factories/fixtures, not hardcoded data)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are isolated (no shared state between tests)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are deterministic (no race conditions or flaky patterns)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are atomic (one assertion per test)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are fast (no unnecessary waits or delays)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are lean (files under {max_file_lines} lines)
|
||||
|
||||
### Knowledge Base Integration
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test level selection framework applied (from `test-levels-framework.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Priority classification applied (from `test-priorities.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Fixture architecture patterns applied (from `fixture-architecture.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Data factory patterns applied (from `data-factories.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Selective testing strategies considered (from `selective-testing.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Flaky test detection patterns considered (from `ci-burn-in.md`)
|
||||
- [ ] Test quality principles applied (from `test-quality.md`)
|
||||
|
||||
### Code Quality
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] All TypeScript types are correct and complete
|
||||
- [ ] No linting errors in generated test files
|
||||
- [ ] Consistent naming conventions followed
|
||||
- [ ] Imports are organized and correct
|
||||
- [ ] Code follows project style guide
|
||||
- [ ] No console.log or debug statements in test code
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Integration Points
|
||||
|
||||
### With Framework Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Test framework configuration detected and used
|
||||
- [ ] Directory structure matches framework setup
|
||||
- [ ] Fixtures and helpers follow established patterns
|
||||
- [ ] Naming conventions consistent with framework standards
|
||||
|
||||
### With BMad Workflows (If Available - OPTIONAL)
|
||||
|
||||
**With Story Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Story ID correctly referenced in output (if story available)
|
||||
- [ ] Acceptance criteria from story reflected in tests (if story available)
|
||||
- [ ] Technical constraints from story considered (if story available)
|
||||
|
||||
**With test-design Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] P0 scenarios from test-design prioritized (if test-design available)
|
||||
- [ ] Risk assessment from test-design considered (if test-design available)
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage strategy aligned with test-design (if test-design available)
|
||||
|
||||
**With atdd Workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] ATDD artifacts provided or located (manual handoff; `atdd` not auto-run)
|
||||
- [ ] Existing ATDD tests checked (if story had ATDD workflow run)
|
||||
- [ ] Expansion beyond ATDD planned (edge cases, negative paths)
|
||||
- [ ] No duplicate coverage with ATDD tests
|
||||
|
||||
### With CI Pipeline
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Tests can run in CI environment
|
||||
- [ ] Tests are parallelizable (no shared state)
|
||||
- [ ] Tests have appropriate timeouts
|
||||
- [ ] Tests clean up their data (no CI environment pollution)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Completion Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
All of the following must be true before marking this workflow as complete:
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Execution mode determined** (BMad-Integrated, Standalone, or Auto-discover)
|
||||
- [ ] **Framework configuration loaded** and validated
|
||||
- [ ] **Coverage analysis completed** (gaps identified if analyze_coverage true)
|
||||
- [ ] **Automation targets identified** (what needs testing)
|
||||
- [ ] **Test levels selected** appropriately (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
|
||||
- [ ] **Duplicate coverage avoided** (same behavior not tested at multiple levels)
|
||||
- [ ] **Test priorities assigned** (P0, P1, P2, P3)
|
||||
- [ ] **Fixture architecture created/enhanced** with auto-cleanup
|
||||
- [ ] **Data factories created/enhanced** using faker (no hardcoded data)
|
||||
- [ ] **Helper utilities created/enhanced** (if needed)
|
||||
- [ ] **Test files generated** at appropriate levels (E2E, API, Component, Unit)
|
||||
- [ ] **Given-When-Then format used** consistently across all tests
|
||||
- [ ] **Priority tags added** to all test names ([P0], [P1], [P2], [P3])
|
||||
- [ ] **data-testid selectors used** in E2E tests (not CSS classes)
|
||||
- [ ] **Network-first pattern applied** (route interception before navigation)
|
||||
- [ ] **Quality standards enforced** (no hard waits, no flaky patterns, self-cleaning, deterministic)
|
||||
- [ ] **Test README updated** with execution instructions and patterns
|
||||
- [ ] **package.json scripts updated** with test execution commands
|
||||
- [ ] **Test suite run locally** (if run_tests_after_generation true)
|
||||
- [ ] **Tests validated** (if auto_validate enabled)
|
||||
- [ ] **Failures healed** (if auto_heal_failures enabled and tests failed)
|
||||
- [ ] **Healing report generated** (if healing attempted)
|
||||
- [ ] **Unfixable tests marked** with test.fixme() and detailed comments (if any)
|
||||
- [ ] **Automation summary created** and saved to correct location
|
||||
- [ ] **Output file formatted correctly**
|
||||
- [ ] **Knowledge base references applied** and documented (including healing fragments if used)
|
||||
- [ ] **No test quality issues** (flaky patterns, race conditions, hardcoded data, page objects)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Issues and Resolutions
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: BMad artifacts not found
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Story, tech-spec, or PRD files not found when variables are set.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **automate does NOT require BMad artifacts** - they are OPTIONAL enhancements
|
||||
- If files not found, switch to Standalone Mode automatically
|
||||
- Analyze source code directly without BMad context
|
||||
- Continue workflow without halting
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Framework configuration not found
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** No playwright.config.ts or cypress.config.ts found.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **HALT workflow** - framework is required
|
||||
- Message: "Framework scaffolding required. Run `bmad tea *framework` first."
|
||||
- User must run framework workflow before automate
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: No automation targets identified
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Neither story, target_feature, nor target_files specified, and auto-discover finds nothing.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Check if source_dir variable is correct
|
||||
- Verify source code exists in project
|
||||
- Ask user to specify target_feature or target_files explicitly
|
||||
- Provide examples: `target_feature: "src/auth/"` or `target_files: "src/auth/login.ts,src/auth/session.ts"`
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Duplicate coverage detected
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Same behavior tested at multiple levels (E2E + API + Component).
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Review test level selection framework (test-levels-framework.md)
|
||||
- Use E2E for critical happy path ONLY
|
||||
- Use API for business logic variations
|
||||
- Use Component for UI edge cases
|
||||
- Remove redundant tests that duplicate coverage
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Tests have hardcoded data
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Tests use hardcoded email addresses, passwords, or other data.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Replace all hardcoded data with factory function calls
|
||||
- Use faker for all random data generation
|
||||
- Update data-factories to support all required test scenarios
|
||||
- Example: `createUser({ email: faker.internet.email() })`
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Tests are flaky
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Tests fail intermittently, pass on retry.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Remove all hard waits (`page.waitForTimeout()`)
|
||||
- Use explicit waits (`page.waitForSelector()`)
|
||||
- Apply network-first pattern (route interception before navigation)
|
||||
- Remove conditional flow (`if (await element.isVisible())`)
|
||||
- Ensure tests are deterministic (no race conditions)
|
||||
- Run burn-in loop (10 iterations) to detect flakiness
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Fixtures don't clean up data
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Test data persists after test run, causing test pollution.
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Ensure all fixtures have cleanup in teardown phase
|
||||
- Cleanup happens AFTER `await use(data)`
|
||||
- Call deletion/cleanup functions (deleteUser, deleteProduct, etc.)
|
||||
- Verify cleanup works by checking database/storage after test run
|
||||
|
||||
### Issue: Tests too slow
|
||||
|
||||
**Problem:** Tests take longer than 90 seconds (max_test_duration).
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Remove unnecessary waits and delays
|
||||
- Use parallel execution where possible
|
||||
- Mock external services (don't make real API calls)
|
||||
- Use API tests instead of E2E for business logic
|
||||
- Optimize test data creation (use in-memory database, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes for TEA Agent
|
||||
|
||||
- **automate is flexible:** Can work with or without BMad artifacts (story, tech-spec, PRD are OPTIONAL)
|
||||
- **Standalone mode is powerful:** Analyze any codebase and generate tests independently
|
||||
- **Auto-discover mode:** Scan codebase for features needing tests when no targets specified
|
||||
- **Framework is the ONLY hard requirement:** HALT if framework config missing, otherwise proceed
|
||||
- **Avoid duplicate coverage:** E2E for critical paths only, API/Component for variations
|
||||
- **Priority tagging enables selective execution:** P0 tests run on every commit, P1 on PR, P2 nightly
|
||||
- **Network-first pattern prevents race conditions:** Route interception BEFORE navigation
|
||||
- **No page objects:** Keep tests simple, direct, and maintainable
|
||||
- **Use knowledge base:** Load relevant fragments (test-levels, test-priorities, fixture-architecture, data-factories, healing patterns) for guidance
|
||||
- **Deterministic tests only:** No hard waits, no conditional flow, no flaky patterns allowed
|
||||
- **Optional healing:** auto_heal_failures disabled by default (opt-in for automatic test healing)
|
||||
- **Graceful degradation:** Healing works without Playwright MCP (pattern-based fallback)
|
||||
- **Unfixable tests handled:** Mark with test.fixme() and detailed comments (not silently broken)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
|
||||
<!-- Powered by BMAD-CORE™ -->
|
||||
|
||||
# Test Automation Expansion
|
||||
|
||||
**Workflow ID**: `_bmad/tea/testarch/automate`
|
||||
**Version**: 5.0 (Step-File Architecture)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Expands test automation coverage by generating prioritized tests at the appropriate level (E2E, API, Component, Unit) with supporting fixtures and helpers.
|
||||
|
||||
Modes:
|
||||
|
||||
- **BMad-Integrated**: Uses story/PRD/test-design artifacts when available
|
||||
- **Standalone**: Analyzes existing codebase without BMad artifacts
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
|
||||
|
||||
This workflow uses **step-file architecture** for disciplined execution:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Micro-file Design**: Each step is self-contained
|
||||
- **JIT Loading**: Only the current step file is in memory
|
||||
- **Sequential Enforcement**: Execute steps in order without skipping
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## INITIALIZATION SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Configuration Loading
|
||||
|
||||
From `workflow.yaml`, resolve:
|
||||
|
||||
- `config_source`, `test_artifacts`, `user_name`, `communication_language`, `document_output_language`, `date`
|
||||
- `test_dir`, `source_dir`, `coverage_target`, `standalone_mode`
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. First Step
|
||||
|
||||
Load, read completely, and execute:
|
||||
`{project-root}/_bmad/tea/workflows/testarch/automate/steps-c/step-01-preflight-and-context.md`
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Resume Support
|
||||
|
||||
If the user selects **Resume** mode, load, read completely, and execute:
|
||||
`{project-root}/_bmad/tea/workflows/testarch/automate/steps-c/step-01b-resume.md`
|
||||
|
||||
This checks the output document for progress tracking frontmatter and routes to the next incomplete step.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-01-preflight-and-context'
|
||||
description: 'Determine mode, verify framework, and load context and knowledge'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md'
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-02-identify-targets.md'
|
||||
knowledgeIndex: '{project-root}/_bmad/tea/testarch/tea-index.csv'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 1: Preflight & Context Loading
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Determine execution mode, verify framework readiness, and load the necessary artifacts and knowledge fragments.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
- 🚫 Halt if framework scaffolding is missing
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Record outputs before proceeding
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: config, loaded artifacts, and knowledge fragments
|
||||
- Focus: this step's goal only
|
||||
- Limits: do not execute future steps
|
||||
- Dependencies: prior steps' outputs (if any)
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise.
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Verify Framework
|
||||
|
||||
Ensure a framework exists:
|
||||
|
||||
- `playwright.config.ts` or `cypress.config.ts`
|
||||
- `package.json` includes test dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
If missing: **HALT** with message "Run `framework` workflow first."
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Determine Execution Mode
|
||||
|
||||
- **BMad-Integrated** if story/tech-spec/test-design artifacts are provided or found
|
||||
- **Standalone** if only source code is available
|
||||
- If unclear, ask the user which mode to use
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Load Context
|
||||
|
||||
### BMad-Integrated (if available)
|
||||
|
||||
- Story with acceptance criteria
|
||||
- PRD and/or tech spec
|
||||
- Test-design document (if exists)
|
||||
|
||||
### Standalone
|
||||
|
||||
- Skip artifacts; proceed to codebase analysis
|
||||
|
||||
### Always Load
|
||||
|
||||
- Test framework config
|
||||
- Existing test structure in `{test_dir}`
|
||||
- Existing tests (for coverage gaps)
|
||||
|
||||
### Read TEA Config Flags
|
||||
|
||||
- From `{config_source}` read `tea_use_playwright_utils`
|
||||
- From `{config_source}` read `tea_browser_automation`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Load Knowledge Base Fragments
|
||||
|
||||
Use `{knowledgeIndex}` and load only what is required.
|
||||
|
||||
**Core (always load):**
|
||||
|
||||
- `test-levels-framework.md`
|
||||
- `test-priorities-matrix.md`
|
||||
- `data-factories.md`
|
||||
- `selective-testing.md`
|
||||
- `ci-burn-in.md`
|
||||
- `test-quality.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Playwright Utils (if enabled):**
|
||||
|
||||
- `overview.md`, `api-request.md`, `network-recorder.md`, `auth-session.md`, `intercept-network-call.md`, `recurse.md`, `log.md`, `file-utils.md`, `burn-in.md`, `network-error-monitor.md`, `fixtures-composition.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Traditional Patterns (if Playwright Utils disabled):**
|
||||
|
||||
- `fixture-architecture.md`
|
||||
- `network-first.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Healing (if auto-heal enabled):**
|
||||
|
||||
- `test-healing-patterns.md`
|
||||
- `selector-resilience.md`
|
||||
- `timing-debugging.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**Playwright CLI (if tea_browser_automation is "cli" or "auto"):**
|
||||
|
||||
- `playwright-cli.md`
|
||||
|
||||
**MCP Patterns (if tea_browser_automation is "mcp" or "auto"):**
|
||||
|
||||
- (existing MCP-related fragments, if any are added in future)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Confirm Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
Summarize loaded artifacts, framework, and knowledge fragments, then proceed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Save Progress
|
||||
|
||||
**Save this step's accumulated work to `{outputFile}`.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` does not exist** (first save), create it with YAML frontmatter:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
---
|
||||
stepsCompleted: ['step-01-preflight-and-context']
|
||||
lastStep: 'step-01-preflight-and-context'
|
||||
lastSaved: '{date}'
|
||||
---
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then write this step's output below the frontmatter.
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` already exists**, update:
|
||||
- Add `'step-01-preflight-and-context'` to `stepsCompleted` array (only if not already present)
|
||||
- Set `lastStep: 'step-01-preflight-and-context'`
|
||||
- Set `lastSaved: '{date}'`
|
||||
- Append this step's output to the appropriate section.
|
||||
|
||||
Load next step: `{nextStepFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Step completed in full with required outputs
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipped sequence steps or missing outputs
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps is FORBIDDEN.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-01b-resume'
|
||||
description: 'Resume interrupted workflow from last completed step'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 1b: Resume Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Resume an interrupted workflow by loading the existing output document, displaying progress, and routing to the next incomplete step.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: Output document with progress frontmatter
|
||||
- Focus: Load progress and route to next step
|
||||
- Limits: Do not re-execute completed steps
|
||||
- Dependencies: Output document must exist from a previous run
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Load Output Document
|
||||
|
||||
Read `{outputFile}` and parse YAML frontmatter for:
|
||||
|
||||
- `stepsCompleted` — array of completed step names
|
||||
- `lastStep` — last completed step name
|
||||
- `lastSaved` — timestamp of last save
|
||||
|
||||
**If `{outputFile}` does not exist**, display:
|
||||
|
||||
"⚠️ **No previous progress found.** There is no output document to resume from. Please use **[C] Create** to start a fresh workflow run."
|
||||
|
||||
**THEN:** Halt. Do not proceed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Display Progress Dashboard
|
||||
|
||||
Display progress with ✅/⬜ indicators:
|
||||
|
||||
1. ✅/⬜ Preflight & Context (step-01-preflight-and-context)
|
||||
2. ✅/⬜ Identify Targets (step-02-identify-targets)
|
||||
3. ✅/⬜ Generate Tests + Aggregate (step-03c-aggregate)
|
||||
4. ✅/⬜ Validate & Summarize (step-04-validate-and-summarize)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Route to Next Step
|
||||
|
||||
Based on `lastStep`, load the next incomplete step:
|
||||
|
||||
- `'step-01-preflight-and-context'` → load `./step-02-identify-targets.md`
|
||||
- `'step-02-identify-targets'` → load `./step-03-generate-tests.md`
|
||||
- `'step-03c-aggregate'` → load `./step-04-validate-and-summarize.md`
|
||||
- `'step-04-validate-and-summarize'` → **Workflow already complete.** Display: "✅ **All steps completed.** Use **[V] Validate** to review outputs or **[E] Edit** to make revisions." Then halt.
|
||||
|
||||
**If `lastStep` does not match any value above**, display: "⚠️ **Unknown progress state** (`lastStep`: {lastStep}). Please use **[C] Create** to start fresh." Then halt.
|
||||
|
||||
**Otherwise**, load the identified step file, read completely, and execute.
|
||||
|
||||
The existing content in `{outputFile}` provides context from previously completed steps.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Output document loaded and parsed correctly
|
||||
- Progress dashboard displayed accurately
|
||||
- Routed to correct next step
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Not loading output document
|
||||
- Incorrect progress display
|
||||
- Routing to wrong step
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Resume MUST route to the exact next incomplete step. Never re-execute completed steps.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-02-identify-targets'
|
||||
description: 'Identify automation targets and create coverage plan'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md'
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-03-generate-tests.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 2: Identify Automation Targets
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Determine what needs to be tested and select appropriate test levels and priorities.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
- 🚫 Avoid duplicate coverage across test levels
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Record outputs before proceeding
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: config, loaded artifacts, and knowledge fragments
|
||||
- Focus: this step's goal only
|
||||
- Limits: do not execute future steps
|
||||
- Dependencies: prior steps' outputs (if any)
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise.
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Determine Targets
|
||||
|
||||
**BMad-Integrated:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Map acceptance criteria to test scenarios
|
||||
- Check for existing ATDD outputs to avoid duplication
|
||||
- Expand coverage with edge cases and negative paths
|
||||
|
||||
**Standalone:**
|
||||
|
||||
- If specific target feature/files are provided, focus there
|
||||
- Otherwise auto-discover features in `{source_dir}`
|
||||
- Prioritize critical paths, integrations, and untested logic
|
||||
|
||||
**Browser Exploration (if `tea_browser_automation` is `cli` or `auto`):**
|
||||
|
||||
> **Fallback:** If CLI is not installed, fall back to MCP (if available) or skip browser exploration and rely on code/doc analysis.
|
||||
|
||||
Use CLI to explore the application and identify testable pages/flows:
|
||||
|
||||
1. `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate open <target_url>`
|
||||
2. `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate snapshot` → capture page structure and element refs
|
||||
3. Analyze snapshot output to identify testable elements and flows
|
||||
4. `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate close`
|
||||
|
||||
> **Session Hygiene:** Always close sessions using `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate close`. Do NOT use `close-all` — it kills every session on the machine and breaks parallel execution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Choose Test Levels
|
||||
|
||||
Use `test-levels-framework.md` to select:
|
||||
|
||||
- **E2E** for critical user journeys
|
||||
- **API** for business logic and service contracts
|
||||
- **Component** for UI behavior
|
||||
- **Unit** for pure logic and edge cases
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Assign Priorities
|
||||
|
||||
Use `test-priorities-matrix.md`:
|
||||
|
||||
- P0: Critical path + high risk
|
||||
- P1: Important flows + medium/high risk
|
||||
- P2: Secondary + edge cases
|
||||
- P3: Optional/rare scenarios
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Coverage Plan
|
||||
|
||||
Produce a concise coverage plan:
|
||||
|
||||
- Targets by test level
|
||||
- Priority assignments
|
||||
- Justification for coverage scope (critical-paths/comprehensive/selective)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Save Progress
|
||||
|
||||
**Save this step's accumulated work to `{outputFile}`.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` does not exist** (first save), create it with YAML frontmatter:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
---
|
||||
stepsCompleted: ['step-02-identify-targets']
|
||||
lastStep: 'step-02-identify-targets'
|
||||
lastSaved: '{date}'
|
||||
---
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then write this step's output below the frontmatter.
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` already exists**, update:
|
||||
- Add `'step-02-identify-targets'` to `stepsCompleted` array (only if not already present)
|
||||
- Set `lastStep: 'step-02-identify-targets'`
|
||||
- Set `lastSaved: '{date}'`
|
||||
- Append this step's output to the appropriate section.
|
||||
|
||||
Load next step: `{nextStepFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Step completed in full with required outputs
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipped sequence steps or missing outputs
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps is FORBIDDEN.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,199 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-03-generate-tests'
|
||||
description: 'Orchestrate parallel test generation via subprocesses'
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-03c-aggregate.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 3: Orchestrate Parallel Test Generation
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Launch parallel subprocesses to generate API and E2E tests simultaneously for maximum performance.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
- ✅ Launch TWO subprocesses in PARALLEL
|
||||
- ✅ Wait for BOTH subprocesses to complete
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT generate tests sequentially (use subprocesses)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT proceed until both subprocesses finish
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Wait for subprocess outputs
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: config, coverage plan from Step 2, knowledge fragments
|
||||
- Focus: subprocess orchestration only
|
||||
- Limits: do not generate tests directly (delegate to subprocesses)
|
||||
- Dependencies: Step 2 outputs (coverage plan, target features)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Prepare Subprocess Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
**Generate unique timestamp** for temp file naming:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const timestamp = new Date().toISOString().replace(/[:.]/g, '-');
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Prepare input context for both subprocesses:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const subprocessContext = {
|
||||
features: /* from Step 2 coverage plan */,
|
||||
knowledge_fragments_loaded: /* list of fragments */,
|
||||
config: {
|
||||
test_framework: config.test_framework,
|
||||
use_playwright_utils: config.tea_use_playwright_utils,
|
||||
browser_automation: config.tea_browser_automation // "auto" | "cli" | "mcp" | "none"
|
||||
},
|
||||
timestamp: timestamp
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Launch Subprocess A: API Test Generation
|
||||
|
||||
**Launch subprocess in parallel:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Subprocess File:** `./step-03a-subprocess-api.md`
|
||||
- **Output File:** `/tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-${timestamp}.json`
|
||||
- **Context:** Pass `subprocessContext`
|
||||
- **Execution:** PARALLEL (non-blocking)
|
||||
|
||||
**System Action:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
🚀 Launching Subprocess A: API Test Generation
|
||||
📝 Output: /tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-${timestamp}.json
|
||||
⏳ Status: Running in parallel...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Launch Subprocess B: E2E Test Generation
|
||||
|
||||
**Launch subprocess in parallel:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Subprocess File:** `./step-03b-subprocess-e2e.md`
|
||||
- **Output File:** `/tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-${timestamp}.json`
|
||||
- **Context:** Pass `subprocessContext`
|
||||
- **Execution:** PARALLEL (non-blocking)
|
||||
|
||||
**System Action:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
🚀 Launching Subprocess B: E2E Test Generation
|
||||
📝 Output: /tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-${timestamp}.json
|
||||
⏳ Status: Running in parallel...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Wait for Both Subprocesses to Complete
|
||||
|
||||
**Monitor subprocess execution:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
⏳ Waiting for subprocesses to complete...
|
||||
├── Subprocess A (API): Running... ⟳
|
||||
└── Subprocess B (E2E): Running... ⟳
|
||||
|
||||
[... time passes ...]
|
||||
|
||||
├── Subprocess A (API): Complete ✅
|
||||
└── Subprocess B (E2E): Complete ✅
|
||||
|
||||
✅ All subprocesses completed successfully!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Verify both outputs exist:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const apiOutputExists = fs.existsSync(`/tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-${timestamp}.json`);
|
||||
const e2eOutputExists = fs.existsSync(`/tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-${timestamp}.json`);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!apiOutputExists || !e2eOutputExists) {
|
||||
throw new Error('One or both subprocess outputs missing!');
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Performance Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Display performance metrics:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
🚀 Performance Report:
|
||||
- Execution Mode: PARALLEL (2 subprocesses)
|
||||
- API Test Generation: ~X minutes
|
||||
- E2E Test Generation: ~Y minutes
|
||||
- Total Elapsed: ~max(X, Y) minutes
|
||||
- Sequential Would Take: ~(X + Y) minutes
|
||||
- Performance Gain: ~50% faster!
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Proceed to Aggregation
|
||||
|
||||
**Load aggregation step:**
|
||||
Load next step: `{nextStepFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
The aggregation step (3C) will:
|
||||
|
||||
- Read both subprocess outputs
|
||||
- Write all test files to disk
|
||||
- Generate shared fixtures and helpers
|
||||
- Calculate summary statistics
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXIT CONDITION
|
||||
|
||||
Proceed to Step 3C (Aggregation) when:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Subprocess A (API tests) completed successfully
|
||||
- ✅ Subprocess B (E2E tests) completed successfully
|
||||
- ✅ Both output files exist and are valid JSON
|
||||
- ✅ Performance metrics displayed
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT proceed if:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ❌ One or both subprocesses failed
|
||||
- ❌ Output files missing or corrupted
|
||||
- ❌ Timeout occurred (subprocesses took too long)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Both subprocesses launched successfully
|
||||
- Both subprocesses completed without errors
|
||||
- Output files generated and valid
|
||||
- Parallel execution achieved ~50% performance gain
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Failed to launch subprocesses
|
||||
- One or both subprocesses failed
|
||||
- Output files missing or invalid
|
||||
- Attempted sequential generation instead of parallel
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Parallel subprocess execution is MANDATORY for performance.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-03a-subprocess-api'
|
||||
description: 'Subprocess: Generate API tests only'
|
||||
subprocess: true
|
||||
outputFile: '/tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-{{timestamp}}.json'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Subprocess 3A: Generate API Tests
|
||||
|
||||
## SUBPROCESS CONTEXT
|
||||
|
||||
This is an **isolated subprocess** running in parallel with E2E test generation.
|
||||
|
||||
**What you have from parent workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Target features/components identified in Step 2
|
||||
- Knowledge fragments loaded: api-request, data-factories, api-testing-patterns
|
||||
- Config: test framework, Playwright Utils enabled/disabled
|
||||
- Coverage plan: which API endpoints need testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Your task:** Generate API tests ONLY (not E2E, not fixtures, not other test types).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read this entire subprocess file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Generate API tests ONLY
|
||||
- ✅ Output structured JSON to temp file
|
||||
- ✅ Follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT generate E2E tests (that's subprocess 3B)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT run tests (that's step 4)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT generate fixtures yet (that's step 3C aggregation)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## SUBPROCESS TASK
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Identify API Endpoints
|
||||
|
||||
From the coverage plan (Step 2 output), identify:
|
||||
|
||||
- Which API endpoints need test coverage
|
||||
- Expected request/response formats
|
||||
- Authentication requirements
|
||||
- Error scenarios to test
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Generate API Test Files
|
||||
|
||||
For each API endpoint, create test file in `tests/api/[feature].spec.ts`:
|
||||
|
||||
**Test Structure:**
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test';
|
||||
// If Playwright Utils enabled:
|
||||
// import { apiRequest } from '@playwright-utils/api';
|
||||
|
||||
test.describe('[Feature] API Tests', () => {
|
||||
test('[P0] should handle successful [operation]', async ({ request }) => {
|
||||
// Use apiRequest helper if Playwright Utils enabled
|
||||
// Otherwise use standard request fixture
|
||||
const response = await request.post('/api/endpoint', {
|
||||
data: {
|
||||
/* test data */
|
||||
},
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
expect(response.status()).toBe(200);
|
||||
expect(await response.json()).toMatchObject({
|
||||
/* expected */
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('[P1] should handle [error scenario]', async ({ request }) => {
|
||||
// Test error handling
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirements:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Use `apiRequest()` helper if Playwright Utils enabled (from api-request fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Use data factories for test data (from data-factories fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Follow API testing patterns (from api-testing-patterns fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Include priority tags [P0], [P1], [P2], [P3]
|
||||
- ✅ Test both happy path and error scenarios
|
||||
- ✅ Use proper TypeScript types
|
||||
- ✅ Deterministic assertions (no timing dependencies)
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Track Fixture Needs
|
||||
|
||||
Identify fixtures needed for API tests:
|
||||
|
||||
- Authentication fixtures (auth tokens, API keys)
|
||||
- Data factories (user data, product data, etc.)
|
||||
- API client configurations
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT create fixtures yet** - just track what's needed for aggregation step.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OUTPUT FORMAT
|
||||
|
||||
Write JSON to temp file: `/tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-{{timestamp}}.json`
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"success": true,
|
||||
"subprocess": "api-tests",
|
||||
"tests": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"file": "tests/api/auth.spec.ts",
|
||||
"content": "[full TypeScript test file content]",
|
||||
"description": "API tests for authentication endpoints",
|
||||
"priority_coverage": {
|
||||
"P0": 3,
|
||||
"P1": 2,
|
||||
"P2": 1,
|
||||
"P3": 0
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"file": "tests/api/checkout.spec.ts",
|
||||
"content": "[full TypeScript test file content]",
|
||||
"description": "API tests for checkout endpoints",
|
||||
"priority_coverage": {
|
||||
"P0": 2,
|
||||
"P1": 3,
|
||||
"P2": 1,
|
||||
"P3": 0
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"fixture_needs": ["authToken", "userDataFactory", "productDataFactory"],
|
||||
"knowledge_fragments_used": ["api-request", "data-factories", "api-testing-patterns"],
|
||||
"test_count": 12,
|
||||
"summary": "Generated 12 API test cases covering 3 features"
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**On Error:**
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"success": false,
|
||||
"subprocess": "api-tests",
|
||||
"error": "Error message describing what went wrong",
|
||||
"partial_output": {
|
||||
/* any tests generated before error */
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXIT CONDITION
|
||||
|
||||
Subprocess completes when:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ All API endpoints have test files generated
|
||||
- ✅ All tests follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- ✅ JSON output written to temp file
|
||||
- ✅ Fixture needs tracked
|
||||
|
||||
**Subprocess terminates here.** Parent workflow will read output and proceed to aggregation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SUBPROCESS SUCCESS METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- All API tests generated following patterns
|
||||
- JSON output valid and complete
|
||||
- No E2E/component/unit tests included (out of scope)
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Generated tests other than API tests
|
||||
- Did not follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- Invalid or missing JSON output
|
||||
- Ran tests (not subprocess responsibility)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-03b-subprocess-e2e'
|
||||
description: 'Subprocess: Generate E2E tests only'
|
||||
subprocess: true
|
||||
outputFile: '/tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-{{timestamp}}.json'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Subprocess 3B: Generate E2E Tests
|
||||
|
||||
## SUBPROCESS CONTEXT
|
||||
|
||||
This is an **isolated subprocess** running in parallel with API test generation.
|
||||
|
||||
**What you have from parent workflow:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Target features/user journeys identified in Step 2
|
||||
- Knowledge fragments loaded: fixture-architecture, network-first, selector-resilience
|
||||
- Config: test framework, Playwright Utils enabled/disabled
|
||||
- Coverage plan: which user journeys need E2E testing
|
||||
|
||||
**Your task:** Generate E2E tests ONLY (not API, not fixtures, not other test types).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read this entire subprocess file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Generate E2E tests ONLY
|
||||
- ✅ Output structured JSON to temp file
|
||||
- ✅ Follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT generate API tests (that's subprocess 3A)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT run tests (that's step 4)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT generate fixtures yet (that's step 3C aggregation)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## SUBPROCESS TASK
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Identify User Journeys
|
||||
|
||||
From the coverage plan (Step 2 output), identify:
|
||||
|
||||
- Which user journeys need E2E coverage
|
||||
- Critical user paths (authentication, checkout, profile, etc.)
|
||||
- UI interactions required
|
||||
- Expected visual states
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Browser Interaction (Selector Verification)
|
||||
|
||||
**Automation mode:** `config.tea_browser_automation`
|
||||
|
||||
If `auto` (fall back to MCP if CLI unavailable; if neither available, generate from best practices):
|
||||
|
||||
- Open the target page first, then verify selectors with a snapshot:
|
||||
`playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} open <target_url>`
|
||||
`playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} snapshot` → map refs to Playwright locators
|
||||
- ref `{role: "button", name: "Submit"}` → `page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Submit' })`
|
||||
- ref `{role: "textbox", name: "Email"}` → `page.getByRole('textbox', { name: 'Email' })`
|
||||
- `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} close` when done
|
||||
|
||||
If `cli` (CLI only — do NOT fall back to MCP; generate from best practices if CLI unavailable):
|
||||
|
||||
- Open the target page first, then verify selectors with a snapshot:
|
||||
`playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} open <target_url>`
|
||||
`playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} snapshot` → map refs to Playwright locators
|
||||
- ref `{role: "button", name: "Submit"}` → `page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Submit' })`
|
||||
- ref `{role: "textbox", name: "Email"}` → `page.getByRole('textbox', { name: 'Email' })`
|
||||
- `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} close` when done
|
||||
|
||||
> **Session Hygiene:** Always close sessions using `playwright-cli -s=tea-automate-{{timestamp}} close`. Do NOT use `close-all` — it kills every session on the machine and breaks parallel execution.
|
||||
|
||||
If `mcp`:
|
||||
|
||||
- Use MCP tools for selector verification (current behavior)
|
||||
|
||||
If `none`:
|
||||
|
||||
- Generate selectors from best practices without browser verification
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Generate E2E Test Files
|
||||
|
||||
For each user journey, create test file in `tests/e2e/[feature].spec.ts`:
|
||||
|
||||
**Test Structure:**
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test';
|
||||
|
||||
test.describe('[Feature] E2E User Journey', () => {
|
||||
test('[P0] should complete [user journey]', async ({ page }) => {
|
||||
// Navigate to starting point
|
||||
await page.goto('/feature');
|
||||
|
||||
// Interact with UI
|
||||
await page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Submit' }).click();
|
||||
|
||||
// Assert expected state
|
||||
await expect(page.getByText('Success')).toBeVisible();
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
test('[P1] should handle [edge case]', async ({ page }) => {
|
||||
// Test edge case scenario
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Requirements:**
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ Follow fixture architecture patterns (from fixture-architecture fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Use network-first patterns: intercept before navigate (from network-first fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Use resilient selectors: getByRole, getByText, getByLabel (from selector-resilience fragment)
|
||||
- ✅ Include priority tags [P0], [P1], [P2], [P3]
|
||||
- ✅ Test complete user journeys (not isolated clicks)
|
||||
- ✅ Use proper TypeScript types
|
||||
- ✅ Deterministic waits (no hard sleeps, use expect().toBeVisible())
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Track Fixture Needs
|
||||
|
||||
Identify fixtures needed for E2E tests:
|
||||
|
||||
- Page object models (if complex)
|
||||
- Authentication fixtures (logged-in user state)
|
||||
- Network mocks/intercepts
|
||||
- Test data fixtures
|
||||
|
||||
**Do NOT create fixtures yet** - just track what's needed for aggregation step.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OUTPUT FORMAT
|
||||
|
||||
Write JSON to temp file: `/tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-{{timestamp}}.json`
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"success": true,
|
||||
"subprocess": "e2e-tests",
|
||||
"tests": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"file": "tests/e2e/authentication.spec.ts",
|
||||
"content": "[full TypeScript test file content]",
|
||||
"description": "E2E tests for user authentication journey",
|
||||
"priority_coverage": {
|
||||
"P0": 2,
|
||||
"P1": 3,
|
||||
"P2": 2,
|
||||
"P3": 0
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"file": "tests/e2e/checkout.spec.ts",
|
||||
"content": "[full TypeScript test file content]",
|
||||
"description": "E2E tests for checkout journey",
|
||||
"priority_coverage": {
|
||||
"P0": 3,
|
||||
"P1": 2,
|
||||
"P2": 1,
|
||||
"P3": 0
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"fixture_needs": ["authenticatedUserFixture", "paymentMockFixture", "checkoutDataFixture"],
|
||||
"knowledge_fragments_used": ["fixture-architecture", "network-first", "selector-resilience"],
|
||||
"test_count": 15,
|
||||
"summary": "Generated 15 E2E test cases covering 5 user journeys"
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**On Error:**
|
||||
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"success": false,
|
||||
"subprocess": "e2e-tests",
|
||||
"error": "Error message describing what went wrong",
|
||||
"partial_output": {
|
||||
/* any tests generated before error */
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXIT CONDITION
|
||||
|
||||
Subprocess completes when:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ All user journeys have E2E test files generated
|
||||
- ✅ All tests follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- ✅ JSON output written to temp file
|
||||
- ✅ Fixture needs tracked
|
||||
|
||||
**Subprocess terminates here.** Parent workflow will read output and proceed to aggregation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SUBPROCESS SUCCESS METRICS
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- All E2E tests generated following patterns
|
||||
- JSON output valid and complete
|
||||
- No API/component/unit tests included (out of scope)
|
||||
- Resilient selectors used (getByRole, getByText)
|
||||
- Network-first patterns applied (intercept before navigate)
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Generated tests other than E2E tests
|
||||
- Did not follow knowledge fragment patterns
|
||||
- Invalid or missing JSON output
|
||||
- Ran tests (not subprocess responsibility)
|
||||
- Used brittle selectors (CSS classes, XPath)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,325 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-03c-aggregate'
|
||||
description: 'Aggregate subprocess outputs and complete test infrastructure'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md'
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-04-validate-and-summarize.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 3C: Aggregate Test Generation Results
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Read outputs from parallel subprocesses (API + E2E test generation), aggregate results, and create supporting infrastructure (fixtures, helpers).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
- ✅ Read subprocess outputs from temp files
|
||||
- ✅ Generate shared fixtures based on fixture needs from both subprocesses
|
||||
- ✅ Write all generated test files to disk
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT regenerate tests (use subprocess outputs)
|
||||
- ❌ Do NOT run tests yet (that's step 4)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Record outputs before proceeding
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: config, subprocess outputs from temp files
|
||||
- Focus: aggregation and fixture generation only
|
||||
- Limits: do not execute future steps
|
||||
- Dependencies: Step 3A and 3B subprocess outputs
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Read Subprocess Outputs
|
||||
|
||||
**Read API test subprocess output:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const apiTestsPath = '/tmp/tea-automate-api-tests-{{timestamp}}.json';
|
||||
const apiTestsOutput = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync(apiTestsPath, 'utf8'));
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Read E2E test subprocess output:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const e2eTestsPath = '/tmp/tea-automate-e2e-tests-{{timestamp}}.json';
|
||||
const e2eTestsOutput = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync(e2eTestsPath, 'utf8'));
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Verify both subprocesses succeeded:**
|
||||
|
||||
- Check `apiTestsOutput.success === true`
|
||||
- Check `e2eTestsOutput.success === true`
|
||||
- If either failed, report error and stop (don't proceed)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Write All Test Files to Disk
|
||||
|
||||
**Write API test files:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
apiTestsOutput.tests.forEach((test) => {
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(test.file, test.content, 'utf8');
|
||||
console.log(`✅ Created: ${test.file}`);
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Write E2E test files:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
e2eTestsOutput.tests.forEach((test) => {
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync(test.file, test.content, 'utf8');
|
||||
console.log(`✅ Created: ${test.file}`);
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Aggregate Fixture Needs
|
||||
|
||||
**Collect all fixture needs from both subprocesses:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const allFixtureNeeds = [...apiTestsOutput.fixture_needs, ...e2eTestsOutput.fixture_needs];
|
||||
|
||||
// Remove duplicates
|
||||
const uniqueFixtures = [...new Set(allFixtureNeeds)];
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Categorize fixtures:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Authentication fixtures:** authToken, authenticatedUserFixture, etc.
|
||||
- **Data factories:** userDataFactory, productDataFactory, etc.
|
||||
- **Network mocks:** paymentMockFixture, apiResponseMocks, etc.
|
||||
- **Test helpers:** wait/retry/assertion helpers
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Generate Fixture Infrastructure
|
||||
|
||||
**Create or update fixture files based on needs:**
|
||||
|
||||
**A) Authentication Fixtures** (`tests/fixtures/auth.ts`):
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { test as base } from '@playwright/test';
|
||||
|
||||
export const test = base.extend({
|
||||
authenticatedUser: async ({ page }, use) => {
|
||||
// Login logic
|
||||
await page.goto('/login');
|
||||
await page.fill('[name="email"]', 'test@example.com');
|
||||
await page.fill('[name="password"]', 'password');
|
||||
await page.click('button[type="submit"]');
|
||||
await page.waitForURL('/dashboard');
|
||||
|
||||
await use(page);
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
||||
authToken: async ({ request }, use) => {
|
||||
// Get auth token for API tests
|
||||
const response = await request.post('/api/auth/login', {
|
||||
data: { email: 'test@example.com', password: 'password' },
|
||||
});
|
||||
const { token } = await response.json();
|
||||
|
||||
await use(token);
|
||||
},
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**B) Data Factories** (`tests/fixtures/data-factories.ts`):
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { faker } from '@faker-js/faker';
|
||||
|
||||
export const createUserData = (overrides = {}) => ({
|
||||
name: faker.person.fullName(),
|
||||
email: faker.internet.email(),
|
||||
...overrides,
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
export const createProductData = (overrides = {}) => ({
|
||||
name: faker.commerce.productName(),
|
||||
price: faker.number.int({ min: 10, max: 1000 }),
|
||||
...overrides,
|
||||
});
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**C) Network Mocks** (`tests/fixtures/network-mocks.ts`):
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { Page } from '@playwright/test';
|
||||
|
||||
export const mockPaymentSuccess = async (page: Page) => {
|
||||
await page.route('/api/payment/**', (route) => {
|
||||
route.fulfill({
|
||||
status: 200,
|
||||
body: JSON.stringify({ success: true, transactionId: '12345' }),
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**D) Helper Utilities** (`tests/fixtures/helpers.ts`):
|
||||
|
||||
```typescript
|
||||
import { expect, Page } from '@playwright/test';
|
||||
|
||||
export const waitForApiResponse = async (page: Page, urlPattern: string) => {
|
||||
return page.waitForResponse((response) => response.url().includes(urlPattern) && response.ok());
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Calculate Summary Statistics
|
||||
|
||||
**Aggregate test counts:**
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
const summary = {
|
||||
total_tests: apiTestsOutput.test_count + e2eTestsOutput.test_count,
|
||||
api_tests: apiTestsOutput.test_count,
|
||||
e2e_tests: e2eTestsOutput.test_count,
|
||||
fixtures_created: uniqueFixtures.length,
|
||||
api_test_files: apiTestsOutput.tests.length,
|
||||
e2e_test_files: e2eTestsOutput.tests.length,
|
||||
priority_coverage: {
|
||||
P0: /* sum P0 tests from both */,
|
||||
P1: /* sum P1 tests from both */,
|
||||
P2: /* sum P2 tests from both */,
|
||||
P3: /* sum P3 tests from both */
|
||||
},
|
||||
knowledge_fragments_used: [
|
||||
...apiTestsOutput.knowledge_fragments_used,
|
||||
...e2eTestsOutput.knowledge_fragments_used
|
||||
],
|
||||
subprocess_execution: 'PARALLEL (API + E2E)',
|
||||
performance_gain: '~50% faster than sequential'
|
||||
};
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Store summary for Step 4:**
|
||||
Save summary to temp file for validation step:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
fs.writeFileSync('/tmp/tea-automate-summary-{{timestamp}}.json', JSON.stringify(summary, null, 2), 'utf8');
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Optional Cleanup
|
||||
|
||||
**Clean up subprocess temp files** (optional - can keep for debugging):
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
fs.unlinkSync(apiTestsPath);
|
||||
fs.unlinkSync(e2eTestsPath);
|
||||
console.log('✅ Subprocess temp files cleaned up');
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## OUTPUT SUMMARY
|
||||
|
||||
Display to user:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
✅ Test Generation Complete (Parallel Execution)
|
||||
|
||||
📊 Summary:
|
||||
- Total Tests: {total_tests}
|
||||
- API Tests: {api_tests} ({api_test_files} files)
|
||||
- E2E Tests: {e2e_tests} ({e2e_test_files} files)
|
||||
- Fixtures Created: {fixtures_created}
|
||||
- Priority Coverage:
|
||||
- P0 (Critical): {P0} tests
|
||||
- P1 (High): {P1} tests
|
||||
- P2 (Medium): {P2} tests
|
||||
- P3 (Low): {P3} tests
|
||||
|
||||
🚀 Performance: Parallel execution ~50% faster than sequential
|
||||
|
||||
📂 Generated Files:
|
||||
- tests/api/[feature].spec.ts
|
||||
- tests/e2e/[feature].spec.ts
|
||||
- tests/fixtures/auth.ts
|
||||
- tests/fixtures/data-factories.ts
|
||||
- tests/fixtures/network-mocks.ts
|
||||
- tests/fixtures/helpers.ts
|
||||
|
||||
✅ Ready for validation (Step 4)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXIT CONDITION
|
||||
|
||||
Proceed to Step 4 when:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ All test files written to disk (API + E2E)
|
||||
- ✅ All fixtures and helpers created
|
||||
- ✅ Summary statistics calculated and saved
|
||||
- ✅ Output displayed to user
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Save Progress
|
||||
|
||||
**Save this step's accumulated work to `{outputFile}`.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` does not exist** (first save), create it with YAML frontmatter:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
---
|
||||
stepsCompleted: ['step-03c-aggregate']
|
||||
lastStep: 'step-03c-aggregate'
|
||||
lastSaved: '{date}'
|
||||
---
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then write this step's output below the frontmatter.
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` already exists**, update:
|
||||
- Add `'step-03c-aggregate'` to `stepsCompleted` array (only if not already present)
|
||||
- Set `lastStep: 'step-03c-aggregate'`
|
||||
- Set `lastSaved: '{date}'`
|
||||
- Append this step's output to the appropriate section.
|
||||
|
||||
Load next step: `{nextStepFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Both subprocesses succeeded
|
||||
- All test files written to disk
|
||||
- Fixtures generated based on subprocess needs
|
||||
- Summary complete and accurate
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- One or both subprocesses failed
|
||||
- Test files not written to disk
|
||||
- Fixtures missing or incomplete
|
||||
- Summary missing or inaccurate
|
||||
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Do NOT proceed to Step 4 if aggregation incomplete.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-04-validate-and-summarize'
|
||||
description: 'Validate outputs and produce automation summary'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 4: Validate & Summarize
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL
|
||||
|
||||
Validate generated outputs and produce a concise automation summary.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the entire step file before acting
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
- ✅ Validate against the checklist before completion
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Record outputs before proceeding
|
||||
- 📖 Load the next step only when instructed
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: config, loaded artifacts, and knowledge fragments
|
||||
- Focus: this step's goal only
|
||||
- Limits: do not execute future steps
|
||||
- Dependencies: prior steps' outputs (if any)
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly. Do not skip, reorder, or improvise.
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Validate
|
||||
|
||||
Use `checklist.md` to validate:
|
||||
|
||||
- Framework readiness
|
||||
- Coverage mapping
|
||||
- Test quality and structure
|
||||
- Fixtures, factories, helpers
|
||||
- [ ] CLI sessions cleaned up (no orphaned browsers)
|
||||
- [ ] Temp artifacts stored in `{test_artifacts}/` not random locations
|
||||
|
||||
Fix gaps before proceeding.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Summary Output
|
||||
|
||||
Write `{outputFile}` including:
|
||||
|
||||
- Coverage plan by test level and priority
|
||||
- Files created/updated
|
||||
- Key assumptions and risks
|
||||
- Next recommended workflow (e.g., `test-review` or `trace`)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Save Progress
|
||||
|
||||
**Save this step's accumulated work to `{outputFile}`.**
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` does not exist** (first save), create it with YAML frontmatter:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
---
|
||||
stepsCompleted: ['step-04-validate-and-summarize']
|
||||
lastStep: 'step-04-validate-and-summarize'
|
||||
lastSaved: '{date}'
|
||||
---
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then write this step's output below the frontmatter.
|
||||
|
||||
- **If `{outputFile}` already exists**, update:
|
||||
- Add `'step-04-validate-and-summarize'` to `stepsCompleted` array (only if not already present)
|
||||
- Set `lastStep: 'step-04-validate-and-summarize'`
|
||||
- Set `lastSaved: '{date}'`
|
||||
- Append this step's output to the appropriate section.
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Step completed in full with required outputs
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipped sequence steps or missing outputs
|
||||
**Master Rule:** Skipping steps is FORBIDDEN.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-01-assess'
|
||||
description: 'Load an existing output for editing'
|
||||
nextStepFile: './step-02-apply-edit.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 1: Assess Edit Target
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Identify which output should be edited and load it.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
|
||||
|
||||
### Universal Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the complete step file before taking any action
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
|
||||
### Role Reinforcement:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ You are the Master Test Architect
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Ask the user which output file to edit
|
||||
- 🚫 Do not edit until target is confirmed
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: existing outputs
|
||||
- Focus: select edit target
|
||||
- Limits: no edits yet
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Identify Target
|
||||
|
||||
Ask the user to provide the output file path or select from known outputs.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Load Target
|
||||
|
||||
Read the provided output file in full.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Confirm
|
||||
|
||||
Confirm the target and proceed to edit.
|
||||
|
||||
Load next step: `{nextStepFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Target identified and loaded
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Proceeding without a confirmed target
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-02-apply-edit'
|
||||
description: 'Apply edits to the selected output'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 2: Apply Edits
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Apply the requested edits to the selected output and confirm changes.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
|
||||
|
||||
### Universal Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the complete step file before taking any action
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
|
||||
### Role Reinforcement:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ You are the Master Test Architect
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Only apply edits explicitly requested by the user
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: selected output and user changes
|
||||
- Focus: apply edits only
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Confirm Requested Changes
|
||||
|
||||
Restate what will be changed and confirm.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Apply Changes
|
||||
|
||||
Update the output file accordingly.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Report
|
||||
|
||||
Summarize the edits applied.
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Changes applied and confirmed
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Unconfirmed edits or missing update
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: 'step-01-validate'
|
||||
description: 'Validate workflow outputs against checklist'
|
||||
outputFile: '{test_artifacts}/automate-validation-report.md'
|
||||
validationChecklist: '../checklist.md'
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Step 1: Validate Outputs
|
||||
|
||||
## STEP GOAL:
|
||||
|
||||
Validate outputs using the workflow checklist and record findings.
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES (READ FIRST):
|
||||
|
||||
### Universal Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 📖 Read the complete step file before taking any action
|
||||
- ✅ Speak in `{communication_language}`
|
||||
|
||||
### Role Reinforcement:
|
||||
|
||||
- ✅ You are the Master Test Architect
|
||||
|
||||
### Step-Specific Rules:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Validate against `{validationChecklist}`
|
||||
- 🚫 Do not skip checks
|
||||
|
||||
## EXECUTION PROTOCOLS:
|
||||
|
||||
- 🎯 Follow the MANDATORY SEQUENCE exactly
|
||||
- 💾 Write findings to `{outputFile}`
|
||||
|
||||
## CONTEXT BOUNDARIES:
|
||||
|
||||
- Available context: workflow outputs and checklist
|
||||
- Focus: validation only
|
||||
- Limits: do not modify outputs in this step
|
||||
|
||||
## MANDATORY SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
**CRITICAL:** Follow this sequence exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Load Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Read `{validationChecklist}` and list all criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Validate Outputs
|
||||
|
||||
Evaluate outputs against each checklist item.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Write Report
|
||||
|
||||
Write a validation report to `{outputFile}` with PASS/WARN/FAIL per section.
|
||||
|
||||
## 🚨 SYSTEM SUCCESS/FAILURE METRICS:
|
||||
|
||||
### ✅ SUCCESS:
|
||||
|
||||
- Validation report written
|
||||
- All checklist items evaluated
|
||||
|
||||
### ❌ SYSTEM FAILURE:
|
||||
|
||||
- Skipped checklist items
|
||||
- No report produced
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
validationDate: 2026-01-27
|
||||
workflowName: testarch-automate
|
||||
workflowPath: /Users/murat.ozcan/opensource/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise/src/workflows/testarch/automate
|
||||
validationStatus: COMPLETE
|
||||
completionDate: 2026-01-27 10:03:10
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Report: testarch-automate
|
||||
|
||||
**Validation Started:** 2026-01-27 09:50:21
|
||||
**Validator:** BMAD Workflow Validation System (Codex)
|
||||
**Standards Version:** BMAD Workflow Standards
|
||||
|
||||
## File Structure & Size
|
||||
|
||||
- workflow.md present: YES
|
||||
- instructions.md present: YES
|
||||
- workflow.yaml present: YES
|
||||
- step files found: 7
|
||||
|
||||
**Step File Sizes:**
|
||||
|
||||
- steps-c/step-01-preflight-and-context.md: 113 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-02-identify-targets.md: 85 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-03-generate-tests.md: 76 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-04-validate-and-summarize.md: 62 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-e/step-01-assess.md: 51 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-e/step-02-apply-edit.md: 46 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-v/step-01-validate.md: 53 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- workflow-plan.md present: YES
|
||||
|
||||
## Frontmatter Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- No frontmatter violations found
|
||||
|
||||
## Critical Path Violations
|
||||
|
||||
- No {project-root} hardcoded paths detected in body
|
||||
- No dead relative links detected
|
||||
|
||||
## Menu Handling Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- No menu structures detected (linear step flow) [N/A]
|
||||
|
||||
## Step Type Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Last step steps-v/step-01-validate.md has no nextStepFile (final step OK)
|
||||
- Step type validation assumes linear sequence (no branching/menu). Workflow-plan.md present for reference. [INFO]
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- No templates found in workflow root
|
||||
- Steps with outputFile in frontmatter:
|
||||
- steps-c/step-04-validate-and-summarize.md
|
||||
- steps-v/step-01-validate.md
|
||||
|
||||
## Validation Design Check
|
||||
|
||||
- checklist.md present: YES
|
||||
- Validation steps folder (steps-v) present: YES
|
||||
|
||||
## Instruction Style Check
|
||||
|
||||
- All steps include STEP GOAL, MANDATORY EXECUTION RULES, EXECUTION PROTOCOLS, CONTEXT BOUNDARIES, and SUCCESS/FAILURE metrics
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
- Validation completed: 2026-01-27 10:03:10
|
||||
- Critical issues: 0
|
||||
- Warnings: 0 (informational notes only)
|
||||
- Readiness: READY (manual review optional)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
validationDate: 2026-01-27
|
||||
workflowName: testarch-automate
|
||||
workflowPath: /Users/murat.ozcan/opensource/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise/src/workflows/testarch/automate
|
||||
validationStatus: COMPLETE
|
||||
completionDate: 2026-01-27 10:24:01
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Validation Report: testarch-automate
|
||||
|
||||
**Validation Started:** 2026-01-27 10:24:01
|
||||
**Validator:** BMAD Workflow Validation System (Codex)
|
||||
**Standards Version:** BMAD Workflow Standards
|
||||
|
||||
## File Structure & Size
|
||||
|
||||
- workflow.md present: YES
|
||||
- instructions.md present: YES
|
||||
- workflow.yaml present: YES
|
||||
- step files found: 7
|
||||
|
||||
**Step File Sizes:**
|
||||
|
||||
- steps-c/step-01-preflight-and-context.md: 112 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-02-identify-targets.md: 84 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-03-generate-tests.md: 75 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-04-validate-and-summarize.md: 61 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-e/step-01-assess.md: 50 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-e/step-02-apply-edit.md: 45 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- steps-v/step-01-validate.md: 52 lines [GOOD]
|
||||
- workflow-plan.md present: YES
|
||||
|
||||
## Frontmatter Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- No frontmatter violations found
|
||||
|
||||
## Critical Path Violations
|
||||
|
||||
### Config Variables (Exceptions)
|
||||
|
||||
Standard BMAD config variables treated as valid exceptions: bmb_creations_output_folder, communication_language, document_output_language, output_folder, planning_artifacts, project-root, project_name, test_artifacts, user_name
|
||||
|
||||
- No {project-root} hardcoded paths detected in body
|
||||
|
||||
- No dead relative links detected
|
||||
|
||||
- No module path assumptions detected
|
||||
|
||||
**Status:** ✅ PASS - No critical violations
|
||||
|
||||
## Menu Handling Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- No menu structures detected (linear step flow) [N/A]
|
||||
|
||||
## Step Type Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- steps-c/step-01-preflight-and-context.md: Init [PASS]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-02-identify-targets.md: Middle [PASS]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-03-generate-tests.md: Middle [PASS]
|
||||
- steps-c/step-04-validate-and-summarize.md: Final [PASS]
|
||||
- Step type validation assumes linear sequence (no branching/menu). Workflow-plan.md present for reference. [INFO]
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Templates present: NONE
|
||||
- Steps with outputFile in frontmatter:
|
||||
- steps-c/step-04-validate-and-summarize.md
|
||||
- steps-v/step-01-validate.md
|
||||
- checklist.md present: YES
|
||||
|
||||
## Validation Design Check
|
||||
|
||||
- Validation steps folder (steps-v) present: YES
|
||||
- Validation step(s) present: step-01-validate.md
|
||||
- Validation steps reference checklist data and auto-proceed
|
||||
|
||||
## Instruction Style Check
|
||||
|
||||
- Instruction style: Prescriptive (appropriate for TEA quality/compliance workflows)
|
||||
- Steps emphasize mandatory sequence, explicit success/failure metrics, and risk-based guidance
|
||||
|
||||
## Collaborative Experience Check
|
||||
|
||||
- Overall facilitation quality: GOOD
|
||||
- Steps use progressive prompts and clear role reinforcement; no laundry-list interrogation detected
|
||||
- Flow progression is clear and aligned to workflow goals
|
||||
|
||||
## Subprocess Optimization Opportunities
|
||||
|
||||
- No high-priority subprocess optimizations identified; workflow already uses step-file architecture
|
||||
- Pattern 1 (grep/regex): N/A for most steps
|
||||
- Pattern 2 (per-file analysis): already aligned to validation structure
|
||||
- Pattern 3 (data ops): minimal data file loads
|
||||
- Pattern 4 (parallel): optional for validation only
|
||||
|
||||
## Cohesive Review
|
||||
|
||||
- Overall assessment: GOOD
|
||||
- Flow is linear, goals are clear, and outputs map to TEA artifacts
|
||||
- Voice and tone consistent with Test Architect persona
|
||||
- Recommendation: READY (minor refinements optional)
|
||||
|
||||
## Plan Quality Validation
|
||||
|
||||
- Plan file present: workflow-plan.md
|
||||
- Planned steps found: 7 (all implemented)
|
||||
- Plan implementation status: Fully Implemented
|
||||
|
||||
## Summary
|
||||
|
||||
- Validation completed: 2026-01-27 10:24:01
|
||||
- Critical issues: 0
|
||||
- Warnings: 0 (informational notes only)
|
||||
- Readiness: READY (manual review optional)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
|
||||
# Workflow Plan: testarch-automate
|
||||
|
||||
## Create Mode (steps-c)
|
||||
- step-01-preflight-and-context.md
|
||||
|
||||
- step-02-identify-targets.md
|
||||
- step-03-generate-tests.md
|
||||
- step-04-validate-and-summarize.md
|
||||
|
||||
## Validate Mode (steps-v)
|
||||
- step-01-validate.md
|
||||
|
||||
## Edit Mode (steps-e)
|
||||
- step-01-assess.md
|
||||
- step-02-apply-edit.md
|
||||
|
||||
## Outputs
|
||||
- {test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md
|
||||
|
||||
- Test files under {project-root}/tests
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: testarch-automate
|
||||
description: 'Expand test automation coverage after implementation or analyze existing codebase to generate comprehensive test suite'
|
||||
web_bundle: true
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Test Automation Expansion
|
||||
|
||||
**Goal:** Expand test automation coverage after implementation or analyze existing codebase to generate comprehensive test suite
|
||||
|
||||
**Role:** You are the Master Test Architect.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
|
||||
|
||||
This workflow uses **tri-modal step-file architecture**:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Create mode (steps-c/)**: primary execution flow
|
||||
- **Validate mode (steps-v/)**: validation against checklist
|
||||
- **Edit mode (steps-e/)**: revise existing outputs
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## INITIALIZATION SEQUENCE
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Mode Determination
|
||||
|
||||
"Welcome to the workflow. What would you like to do?"
|
||||
|
||||
- **[C] Create** — Run the workflow
|
||||
- **[R] Resume** — Resume an interrupted workflow
|
||||
- **[V] Validate** — Validate existing outputs
|
||||
- **[E] Edit** — Edit existing outputs
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Route to First Step
|
||||
|
||||
- **If C:** Load `steps-c/step-01-preflight-and-context.md`
|
||||
- **If R:** Load `steps-c/step-01b-resume.md`
|
||||
- **If V:** Load `steps-v/step-01-validate.md`
|
||||
- **If E:** Load `steps-e/step-01-assess.md`
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
|
||||
# Test Architect workflow: automate
|
||||
name: testarch-automate
|
||||
description: "Expand test automation coverage after implementation or analyze existing codebase to generate comprehensive test suite"
|
||||
author: "BMad"
|
||||
|
||||
# Critical variables from config
|
||||
config_source: "{project-root}/_bmad/tea/config.yaml"
|
||||
output_folder: "{config_source}:output_folder"
|
||||
test_artifacts: "{config_source}:test_artifacts"
|
||||
user_name: "{config_source}:user_name"
|
||||
communication_language: "{config_source}:communication_language"
|
||||
document_output_language: "{config_source}:document_output_language"
|
||||
date: system-generated
|
||||
|
||||
# Workflow components
|
||||
installed_path: "{project-root}/_bmad/tea/workflows/testarch/automate"
|
||||
instructions: "{installed_path}/instructions.md"
|
||||
validation: "{installed_path}/checklist.md"
|
||||
template: false
|
||||
|
||||
# Variables and inputs
|
||||
variables:
|
||||
# Execution mode and targeting
|
||||
standalone_mode: true # Can work without BMad artifacts (true) or integrate with BMad (false)
|
||||
coverage_target: "critical-paths" # critical-paths, comprehensive, selective
|
||||
|
||||
# Directory paths
|
||||
test_dir: "{project-root}/tests" # Root test directory
|
||||
source_dir: "{project-root}" # Source code directory (customize if needed, e.g., {project-root}/src or {project-root}/lib)
|
||||
|
||||
# Output configuration
|
||||
default_output_file: "{test_artifacts}/automation-summary.md"
|
||||
|
||||
# Required tools
|
||||
required_tools:
|
||||
- read_file # Read source code, existing tests, BMad artifacts
|
||||
- write_file # Create test files, fixtures, factories, summaries
|
||||
- create_directory # Create test directories
|
||||
- list_files # Discover features and existing tests
|
||||
- search_repo # Find coverage gaps and patterns
|
||||
- glob # Find test files and source files
|
||||
|
||||
tags:
|
||||
- qa
|
||||
- automation
|
||||
- test-architect
|
||||
- regression
|
||||
- coverage
|
||||
|
||||
execution_hints:
|
||||
interactive: false # Minimize prompts
|
||||
autonomous: true # Proceed without user input unless blocked
|
||||
iterative: true
|
||||
␍
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user