webapp testing
A browser-testing workflow with Playwright-oriented examples and server-lifecycle helpers for checking local web application behavior.
Repository star change: +478 over 24.12 hours. 2026-11-02
Check responsive layouts, forms, keyboard access and visual regressions around a real user journey.
A reproducible browser test plan with screenshots, observed defects and final acceptance evidence.
Best for: Developers, QA reviewers and designers checking a site before release.
Editorial update: 2026-11-02 · Suggested sequence; components have not been runtime-tested together.
Browser automation needs compatible local tools and an agent. Remote browser services are optional and may charge. The Vercel guideline entry has Unknown license metadata here; read its source and fetched guideline terms. No full accessibility certification is included.
Choose one complete journey, such as finding a product and submitting a test enquiry. Write observable expectations before automating it. Use the browser-testing component to exercise the controls, and the interface-review component to inspect relevant source and interaction patterns. Keep screenshot comparison and functional assertions separate: a picture can miss a broken form, while a passing click can miss clipped content. Review any externally fetched guideline as untrusted reference material. This kit reviews an existing interface and does not authorize a redesign or certify accessibility compliance.
List the start URL, the intended outcome and permitted actions. Use synthetic form values and an isolated browser session. Record which browser, viewport and platform will supply the baseline so later comparisons mean the same thing.
Review webapp-testing →Check the normal path, an empty state and invalid input. Confirm that real visible controls can be reached and activated. Inspect loading and retry behavior without sending live messages or placing orders from a test session.
Review webapp-testing →Inspect keyboard focus, readable contrast, text scaling and target sizes. Test narrow and wide viewports with long content. Treat automated accessibility output as a partial check and investigate findings in the actual rendered interface.
Review web-design-guidelines →Compare screenshots in the same rendering environment. Explain each intentional difference before updating a baseline. Reproduce every reported defect, rerun the relevant check after a correction and identify browsers or assistive technologies that were not tested.
Review verification-before-completion →Synthetic planning fixture. The expected result is a target to verify, not a claimed live execution.
A synthetic enquiry form: name and email fields, submit control, success state and validation error. Viewports 375×700, 768×900 and 1440×900. No actual email delivery is permitted.
The empty and malformed-email paths show readable errors without a send. Keyboard order reaches every field. The success path is checked using a test endpoint. Screenshots show no clipped page controls; results identify the exact browser and dimensions.
Empty, invalid, success and server-failure paths checked at three viewport sizes.
Check limits: One in-app browser; exact engine version unavailable. Email values are redacted in browser observations. No cross-browser, screen-reader or real delivery certification.
Python 3.13.13 on Windows; ChatGPT in-app browser; standard-library example checker
Checked 2026-11-02. First-party synthetic examples and the stated browser/media checks; not end-to-end execution of the selected external skills.
Fixture source SHA-256: 99bc17994e3e936c09e803c18dec5ccf8d58cb0305f23bb0bd4ae8503ed147f5
ZIP SHA-256: 4211dfc5f44a97fc5e6f32c75d459eb66023bead81e1b77826cbcd89af9bc5ca
python check.py website-testing --source . --output example-output8.2 KB · Original AI Craft Pad fixtures and code under MIT. The ZIP does not install external skills. Read it before running code. Existing files in example-output may be replaced.
Copy this starting point into your agent, then supply the agreed project or files. Copying does not install a skill or run an external action.
Complete the checks below against the actual deliverable and preserve enough evidence for another person to repeat the important steps. Record the environment, source dates and anything that could not be checked. These components were selected from source documentation; this catalog has not executed them together as an integrated system.
Open each source review for installation, license, compatibility and safety signals. Select the components relevant to your task; the kit is not an automatic installer.
A browser-testing workflow with Playwright-oriented examples and server-lifecycle helpers for checking local web application behavior.
Repository star change: +478 over 24.12 hours. 2026-11-02
A lightweight UI review entry point that retrieves Vercel interface rules and reports findings against selected files.
Repository star change: +53 over 24.12 hours. 2026-11-02
A completion-check workflow that ties a claim such as fixed, passing or deployed to fresh evidence from the relevant system.
Repository star change: +587 over 24.12 hours. 2026-11-02
AI Craft Pad authored this runbook. Source software, skills and media retain their own licenses.