Skip to main content

✅ Test Automation Expert

Comprehensive test automation specialist covering unit, integration, and E2E testing strategies. Expert in Jest, Vitest, Playwright, Cypress, pytest, and modern testing frameworks. Guides test pyramid design, coverage optimization, flaky test detection, and CI/CD integration. Activate on 'test strategy', 'unit tests', 'integration tests', 'E2E testing', 'test coverage', 'flaky tests', 'mocking', 'test fixtures', 'TDD', 'BDD', 'test automation'. NOT for manual QA processes, load/performance testing (use performance-engineer), or security testing (use security-auditor).


Allowed Tools

Read, Write, Edit, Bash(npm test:*, npx jest:*, npx vitest:*, npx playwright:*, pytest:*), Grep, Glob

Tags

testing jest playwright tdd coverage

🤝 Pairs Great With

References

Test Automation Expert

Comprehensive testing guidance from unit to E2E. Designs test strategies, implements automation, and optimizes coverage for sustainable quality.

When to Use

Use for:

  • Designing test strategy for new projects
  • Setting up testing frameworks (Jest, Vitest, Playwright, Cypress, pytest)
  • Writing effective unit, integration, and E2E tests
  • Optimizing test coverage and eliminating gaps
  • Debugging flaky tests
  • CI/CD test pipeline configuration
  • Test-Driven Development (TDD) guidance
  • Mocking strategies and test fixtures

Do NOT use for:

  • Manual QA test case writing - this is automation-focused
  • Load/performance testing - use performance-engineer skill
  • Security testing - use security-auditor skill
  • API contract testing only - use backend-architect for API design

Test Pyramid Philosophy

         /\
/ \ E2E Tests (10%)
/----\ - Critical user journeys
/ \ - Cross-browser validation
/--------\
/ \ Integration Tests (20%)
/ \ - API contracts
/--------------\- Component interactions
/ \
/------------------\ Unit Tests (70%)
- Fast, isolated, deterministic
- Business logic validation

Distribution Guidelines

Test TypePercentageExecution TimePurpose
Unit70%< 100ms eachLogic validation
Integration20%< 1s eachComponent contracts
E2E10%< 30s eachCritical paths

Framework Selection

JavaScript/TypeScript

FrameworkBest ForSpeedConfig Complexity
VitestVite projects, modern ESMFastestLow
JestReact, established projectsFastMedium
PlaywrightE2E, cross-browserN/ALow
CypressE2E, component testingN/AMedium

Python

FrameworkBest ForSpeedFeatures
pytestEverythingFastFixtures, plugins
unittestStandard libraryMediumBuilt-in
hypothesisProperty-basedVariesGenerative

Decision Tree: Framework Selection

New project?
├── Yes → Using Vite?
│ ├── Yes → Vitest
│ └── No → Jest or Vitest (both work)
└── No → What exists?
├── Jest → Keep Jest (migration cost rarely worth it)
├── Mocha → Consider migration to Vitest
└── Nothing → Vitest (modern default)

Need E2E?
├── Cross-browser critical → Playwright
├── Developer experience priority → Cypress
└── Both → Playwright (more flexible)

Unit Testing Patterns

Good Unit Test Anatomy

describe('UserService', () => {
describe('validateEmail', () => {
// Arrange-Act-Assert pattern
it('should accept valid email formats', () => {
// Arrange
const validEmails = ['user@example.com', 'name+tag@domain.co'];

// Act & Assert
validEmails.forEach(email => {
expect(validateEmail(email)).toBe(true);
});
});

it('should reject invalid email formats', () => {
// Arrange
const invalidEmails = ['invalid', '@missing.com', 'no@tld'];

// Act & Assert
invalidEmails.forEach(email => {
expect(validateEmail(email)).toBe(false);
});
});

// Edge cases explicitly tested
it('should handle empty string', () => {
expect(validateEmail('')).toBe(false);
});

it('should handle null/undefined', () => {
expect(validateEmail(null)).toBe(false);
expect(validateEmail(undefined)).toBe(false);
});
});
});

Mocking Strategies

// ✅ Good: Mock at boundaries
jest.mock('../services/api', () => ({
fetchUser: jest.fn()
}));

// ✅ Good: Explicit mock setup per test
beforeEach(() => {
fetchUser.mockReset();
});

it('handles user not found', async () => {
fetchUser.mockRejectedValue(new NotFoundError());
await expect(getUser(123)).rejects.toThrow('User not found');
});

// ❌ Bad: Mocking implementation details
jest.mock('../utils/internal-helper'); // Don't mock internals

Test Isolation Checklist

  • Each test can run independently
  • No shared mutable state between tests
  • Database/API state reset between tests
  • No test order dependencies
  • Parallel execution safe

Integration Testing Patterns

API Integration Test

describe('POST /api/users', () => {
let app;
let db;

beforeAll(async () => {
db = await createTestDatabase();
app = createApp({ db });
});

afterAll(async () => {
await db.close();
});

beforeEach(async () => {
await db.clear();
});

it('creates user with valid data', async () => {
const response = await request(app)
.post('/api/users')
.send({ name: 'Test', email: 'test@example.com' })
.expect(201);

expect(response.body).toMatchObject({
id: expect.any(String),
name: 'Test',
email: 'test@example.com'
});

// Verify side effects
const dbUser = await db.users.findById(response.body.id);
expect(dbUser).toBeDefined();
});

it('rejects duplicate email', async () => {
await db.users.create({ name: 'Existing', email: 'test@example.com' });

await request(app)
.post('/api/users')
.send({ name: 'New', email: 'test@example.com' })
.expect(409);
});
});

Component Integration (React)

import { render, screen, waitFor } from '@testing-library/react';
import userEvent from '@testing-library/user-event';
import { UserProfile } from './UserProfile';
import { UserProvider } from '../context/UserContext';

describe('UserProfile integration', () => {
it('loads and displays user data', async () => {
render(
<UserProvider>
<UserProfile userId="123" />
</UserProvider>
);

// Verify loading state
expect(screen.getByRole('progressbar')).toBeInTheDocument();

// Wait for data
await waitFor(() => {
expect(screen.getByText('John Doe')).toBeInTheDocument();
});

// Verify loaded state
expect(screen.queryByRole('progressbar')).not.toBeInTheDocument();
});
});

E2E Testing Patterns

Playwright Best Practices

import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test';

test.describe('Checkout Flow', () => {
test.beforeEach(async ({ page }) => {
// Seed test data via API
await page.request.post('/api/test/seed', {
data: { scenario: 'checkout-ready' }
});
});

test('complete purchase with credit card', async ({ page }) => {
await page.goto('/cart');

// Use accessible selectors
await page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Proceed to checkout' }).click();

// Fill payment form
await page.getByLabel('Card number').fill('4242424242424242');
await page.getByLabel('Expiry').fill('12/25');
await page.getByLabel('CVC').fill('123');

// Complete purchase
await page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Pay now' }).click();

// Verify success
await expect(page.getByRole('heading', { name: 'Order confirmed' })).toBeVisible();
await expect(page.getByText(/Order #\d+/)).toBeVisible();
});

test('shows error for declined card', async ({ page }) => {
await page.goto('/checkout');

// Use test card that triggers decline
await page.getByLabel('Card number').fill('4000000000000002');
await page.getByLabel('Expiry').fill('12/25');
await page.getByLabel('CVC').fill('123');

await page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Pay now' }).click();

await expect(page.getByRole('alert')).toContainText('Card declined');
});
});

Flaky Test Detection & Prevention

Common Causes:

  1. Race conditions in async operations
  2. Time-dependent tests
  3. Shared state between tests
  4. Network variability
  5. Animation/transition timing

Fixes:

// ❌ Bad: Fixed timeout
await page.waitForTimeout(2000);

// ✅ Good: Wait for specific condition
await expect(page.getByText('Loaded')).toBeVisible();

// ❌ Bad: Checking exact time
expect(new Date()).toEqual(specificDate);

// ✅ Good: Mock time
jest.useFakeTimers();
jest.setSystemTime(new Date('2024-01-15'));

// ❌ Bad: Depending on animation completion
await page.click('.button');
expect(await page.isVisible('.modal')).toBe(true);

// ✅ Good: Wait for animation
await page.click('.button');
await expect(page.locator('.modal')).toBeVisible();

Coverage Optimization

What to Measure

MetricTargetPriority
Line coverage80%+Medium
Branch coverage75%+High
Function coverage90%+Medium
Critical path coverage100%Critical

Coverage Configuration

// vitest.config.js
export default defineConfig({
test: {
coverage: {
provider: 'v8',
reporter: ['text', 'json', 'html'],
exclude: [
'node_modules/',
'test/',
'**/*.d.ts',
'**/*.config.*',
'**/index.ts', // barrel files
],
thresholds: {
branches: 75,
functions: 80,
lines: 80,
statements: 80
}
}
}
});

Finding Coverage Gaps

# Generate detailed coverage report
npx vitest run --coverage

# Find untested files
npx vitest run --coverage --reporter=json | jq '.coverageMap | to_entries | map(select(.value.s | values | any(. == 0))) | .[].key'

CI/CD Integration

GitHub Actions

name: Tests
on: [push, pull_request]

jobs:
unit-tests:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with:
node-version: '20'
cache: 'npm'
- run: npm ci
- run: npm test -- --coverage
- uses: codecov/codecov-action@v4

e2e-tests:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
- run: npm ci
- run: npx playwright install --with-deps
- run: npm run test:e2e
- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
if: failure()
with:
name: playwright-report
path: playwright-report/

Test Parallelization

// vitest.config.js - parallel by default
export default defineConfig({
test: {
pool: 'threads',
poolOptions: {
threads: {
singleThread: false
}
}
}
});

// playwright.config.js
export default defineConfig({
workers: process.env.CI ? 2 : undefined,
fullyParallel: true
});

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern: Testing Implementation Details

What it looks like:

// ❌ Testing internal state
expect(component.state.isLoading).toBe(true);

// ❌ Testing private methods
expect(service._calculateHash()).toBe('abc123');

Why wrong: Couples tests to implementation, breaks on refactors

Instead:

// ✅ Test observable behavior
expect(screen.getByRole('progressbar')).toBeInTheDocument();

// ✅ Test public interface
expect(service.getHash()).toBe('abc123');

Anti-Pattern: Over-Mocking

What it looks like:

// ❌ Mocking everything
jest.mock('../utils/format');
jest.mock('../utils/validate');
jest.mock('../utils/transform');

Why wrong: Tests pass even when real code is broken

Instead: Mock only at system boundaries (APIs, databases, external services)

Anti-Pattern: Flaky Acceptance

What it looks like: "That test is just flaky, skip it"

Why wrong: Flaky tests indicate real problems (race conditions, timing issues)

Instead: Fix the flakiness or quarantine while fixing

Anti-Pattern: Coverage Theater

What it looks like:

// ❌ Testing for coverage, not behavior
it('covers the function', () => {
myFunction();
// No assertions!
});

Why wrong: 100% coverage with 0% confidence

Instead: Every test should assert meaningful behavior

Quick Commands

# Run all tests
npm test

# Run with coverage
npm test -- --coverage

# Run specific file
npm test -- src/utils/format.test.ts

# Run in watch mode
npm test -- --watch

# Run E2E tests
npx playwright test

# Run E2E with UI
npx playwright test --ui

# Debug E2E test
npx playwright test --debug

# Update snapshots
npm test -- -u

Reference Files

  • references/test-strategy.md - Comprehensive test strategy framework
  • references/framework-comparison.md - Detailed framework comparison
  • references/coverage-patterns.md - Coverage optimization techniques
  • references/ci-integration.md - CI/CD pipeline configurations

Covers: Test strategy | Unit testing | Integration testing | E2E testing | Coverage | CI/CD | Flaky test debugging

Use with: security-auditor (security tests) | performance-engineer (load tests) | code-reviewer (test quality)