name: dev-test description: "This skill should be used when the user needs to 'debug web applications', 'test UI interactions', 'capture screenshots or network requests', 'test desktop automation', or needs to select between testing tools. Routes to platform-specific E2E testing skills: Chrome MCP for debugging, Playwright for CI/CD, Hammerspoon for macOS, Linux for X11/Wayland." user-invocable: false disable-model-invocation: true
Where This Fits
Main Chat Task Agent
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
/goal <condition> (set at phase entry; refires turns)
dev-implement (loads dev-tdd)
→ dev-delegate
→ Task agent ──────────────────→ uses dev-test (this skill)
↓ loads dev-tdd again
has TDD protocol + gates
→ routes to specific tool
Before choosing testing tools, you MUST load the TDD skill to ensure gate compliance:
Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../skills/dev-tdd/SKILL.md and follow its instructions.
This loads:
- Task reframing (your job is writing tests, not features)
- The Execution Gate (6 mandatory gates before E2E testing)
- GATE 5: READ LOGS (mandatory - cannot skip)
- The Iron Law of TDD (test-first approach)
Read dev-tdd skill content now before selecting testing tools.
This skill routes to the right testing tool. The loaded dev-tdd skill provides TDD protocol details.
Contents
- The Iron Law
- Browser Testing Decision Tree
- Platform Detection
- Sub-Skills Reference
- Unit & Integration Tests
YOU MUST WRITE E2E TESTS FOR USER-FACING FEATURES. This is not negotiable.
When your changes affect what users see or interact with, you MUST:
- Write an E2E test that simulates user behavior
- Run it and verify it PASSES (not just unit tests)
- Document: "E2E: [test name] passes with [evidence]"
- Include screenshot/snapshot for visual changes
Unit tests prove components work. E2E tests prove YOUR feature works for users.
E2E Facts
- Manual testing leaves no evidence and misses regressions — "it worked when I tried it" becomes an unverified claim the moment the code changes again. Capture the manual check as an automated test.
- Backend-only changes still need E2E when they affect user-visible output; "this is just backend" classifies by where the code lives, not by what the user sees.
- "The UI is unchanged" is an assumption until a visual snapshot proves it; asserting it without one is an unverified claim presented as fact.
Fake E2E Detection - STOP
If your "E2E test" does any of these, it's NOT E2E:
| Pattern | Why It's Fake | Real E2E Alternative |
|---|---|---|
grep "success" logs.txt |
Only proves code ran | Verify actual output file/UI/API response |
assert mock.called |
Tests mock, not real system | Use real integration, verify real data |
cat output.txt | wc -l |
File exists ≠ correct content | Read file, assert exact expected content |
| "I ran it manually" | No automation = no evidence | Capture manual test as automated test |
| Check log for icon name | Observability, not verification | Screenshot + visual diff of rendered icon |
| Exit code 0 | Process succeeded ≠ output correct | Verify the actual output data |
The test: If removing the actual implementation still passes your "E2E test", it's fake.
Example of fake E2E that caught nothing:
# FAKE E2E - only checks logs
def test_icon_theme_change():
run_command("set-theme papirus")
logs = read_logs()
assert "papirus" in logs # ❌ FAKE - only proves code ran
# BUG: 89% of icons weren't changed, test still passed!
Real E2E that would have caught the bug:
# REAL E2E - verifies actual output
def test_icon_theme_change():
run_command("set-theme papirus")
screenshot = capture_desktop()
assert visual_diff(screenshot, "expected_papirus.png") < threshold # ✅ REAL
# This would have shown 89% of icons were wrong
Browser Testing Decision Tree
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ BROWSER TESTING REQUIRED? │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Need to debug JS errors or API calls? │
│ (console.log, network requests, XHR) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│ │
YES NO
│ │
▼ ▼
┌───────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────────┐
│ CHROME MCP │ │ Running in CI/CD? │
│ (debugging) │ │ (headless, automated) │
└───────────────────┘ └──────────────────────────┘
│ │
YES NO
│ │
▼ ▼
┌──────────────┐ ┌───────────────────┐
│ PLAYWRIGHT │ │ Cross-browser │
│ MCP │ │ needed? │
└──────────────┘ └───────────────────┘
│ │
YES NO
│ │
▼ ▼
┌──────────────┐ ┌────────────┐
│ PLAYWRIGHT │ │ Either OK │
│ MCP │ │ (prefer │
└──────────────┘ │ Playwright)│
└────────────┘
YOU MUST USE CHROME MCP FOR API/CONSOLE DEBUGGING. NO EXCEPTIONS. YOU MUST USE PLAYWRIGHT MCP FOR CI/CD TESTING. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Quick Decision Table
| Need | Tool | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Debug console errors | Chrome MCP | read_console_messages |
| Inspect API calls/responses | Chrome MCP | read_network_requests |
| Execute custom JS in page | Chrome MCP | javascript_tool |
| Record interaction as GIF | Chrome MCP | gif_creator |
| Headless/CI automation | Playwright MCP | Headless mode |
| Cross-browser testing | Playwright MCP | Firefox/WebKit support |
| Standard E2E suite | Playwright MCP | Test isolation, maturity |
| Interactive debugging | Chrome MCP | Real browser, console access |
Capability Comparison
| Capability | Playwright MCP | Chrome MCP |
|---|---|---|
| Navigate/click/type | ✅ | ✅ |
| Accessibility tree | ✅ browser_snapshot |
✅ read_page |
| Screenshots | ✅ | ✅ |
| Console messages | ❌ | ✅ read_console_messages |
| Network requests | ❌ | ✅ read_network_requests |
| JavaScript execution | ❌ | ✅ javascript_tool |
| GIF recording | ❌ | ✅ gif_creator |
| Headless mode | ✅ | ❌ (requires visible browser) |
| Cross-browser | ✅ (Chromium/Firefox/WebKit) | ❌ (Chrome only) |
| Natural language find | ❌ | ✅ find |
Browser MCP Facts
- Playwright MCP cannot read console messages or network requests — debugging those requires Chrome MCP (
read_console_messages,read_network_requests). Chrome MCP cannot run headless — CI/CD requires Playwright MCP. Choosing by familiarity instead of by these constraints produces a test that cannot observe what it claims to verify. - An API response inferred from code is not the real response — real data differs. Asserting behavior from inference instead of
read_network_requestsis an unverified claim presented as fact.
Platform Detection
Detect the operating system and display server to select the appropriate testing tool:
# Detect platform for desktop automation
case "$(uname -s)" in
Darwin) echo "macOS - use dev-test-hammerspoon" ;;
Linux)
if [ "$XDG_SESSION_TYPE" = "wayland" ]; then
echo "Linux/Wayland - use dev-test-linux (ydotool)"
else
echo "Linux/X11 - use dev-test-linux (xdotool)"
fi
;;
esac
Desktop Automation Decision Tree
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ DESKTOP AUTOMATION REQUIRED? │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────┐
│ Platform? │
└─────────────────┘
/ | \
macOS Linux Windows
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
┌──────────────┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌─────────┐
│ HAMMERSPOON │ │ LINUX │ │ NOT │
│ (dev-test- │ │ (dev- │ │ SUPPORTED│
│ hammerspoon) │ │ test- │ └─────────┘
└──────────────┘ │ linux) │
└─────────┘
│
┌─────────┴─────────┐
│ Display Server? │
└───────────────────┘
/ \
Wayland X11
│ │
▼ ▼
┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐
│ ydotool │ │ xdotool │
└──────────┘ └──────────┘
Sub-Skills Reference
Verify tools are available BEFORE proceeding. Missing tools = FULL STOP.
Each sub-skill has its own availability gate. Load the appropriate skill and follow its gate.
Browser Testing
| Skill | Use Case | Key Capabilities |
|---|---|---|
skills/dev-test-chrome/SKILL.md (via cache lookup) |
Debugging, console/network inspection | read_console_messages, read_network_requests, javascript_tool |
skills/dev-test-playwright/SKILL.md (via cache lookup) |
CI/CD, headless, cross-browser E2E | Headless mode, Firefox/WebKit, test isolation |
Desktop Automation
| Skill | Platform | Primary Tool |
|---|---|---|
skills/dev-test-hammerspoon/SKILL.md (via cache lookup) |
macOS | Hammerspoon (hs) |
skills/dev-test-linux/SKILL.md (via cache lookup) |
Linux | ydotool (Wayland) / xdotool (X11) |
Unit & Integration Tests
Test Discovery
Locate test directories and identify the test framework used in the project:
# Find test directory
ls -d tests/ test/ spec/ __tests__/ 2>/dev/null
# Find test framework
cat package.json 2>/dev/null | grep -E "(test|jest)"
cat pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -i pytest
cat Cargo.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -i "\[dev-dependencies\]"
cat meson.build 2>/dev/null | grep -i test
Common Test Frameworks
| Language | Framework | Command |
|---|---|---|
| Python | pytest | pytest tests/ -v |
| JavaScript | jest | npm test |
| TypeScript | vitest | npx vitest |
| Rust | cargo | cargo test |
| C/C++ | meson | meson test -C build -v |
| Go | go test | go test ./... |
CLI Application Testing
Execute CLI applications with test inputs and verify outputs against expected results:
# Run with test inputs
./app --test-mode input.txt > output.txt
# Compare to expected
diff expected.txt output.txt
# Check exit code
./app --validate file && echo "PASS" || echo "FAIL"
Output Requirements
Every test run MUST be documented in LEARNINGS.md:
## Test Run: [Description]
**Tool:** [Chrome MCP / Playwright / Hammerspoon / ydotool / pytest / etc.]
**Command:**
```bash
pytest tests/ -v
Output:
tests/test_feature.py::test_basic PASSED
tests/test_feature.py::test_edge_case PASSED
tests/test_feature.py::test_error FAILED
1 failed, 2 passed
Result: 2/3 PASS, 1 FAIL
Next: Fix test_error failure
## Integration
For TDD protocol (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR), see:
Read `${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../skills/dev-tdd/SKILL.md` and follow its instructions.
This skill is invoked by Task agents during `dev-implement` phase.