e2e-evidence-report
Skill1 starsChanged 56 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Plan E2E test cases, run them via e2e-test-workflow recording every browser case, verify result data with read-only queries on the run-owned DB, and publish an HTML evidence report in a temp directory. Use when E2E results must be proven with recordings and DB evidence.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 20
Create the run's evidence directory outside the repository with mktemp -d "${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/vulpora-e2e-evidence.XXXXXX".
- Very specific: line 21
Every artifact of this skill — plan, overlay config, raw outputs, evidence.json, the rendered report — lives there.
- Distinctive: line 22
Never write report files into the repository, and never reuse a directory from an earlier run.
- Very specific: line 30
when neither covers the request, draft TCs from the code's endpoints and screens, mark them DRAFT, and stop for the user's approval before …
- Distinctive: line 49
API lane: keep the runner's request/response captures (masked) for every exchange the TC makes.
- Very specific: line 50
DB verification, per case, before its cleanup: run each TC's DB assertion against the run-owned database from the workflow's …
- Very specific: line 61
Write evidence.json in the evidence directory per the evidence schema.
- Distinctive: line 83
No approved TC plan → stop after drafting it.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
E2E evidence report
Turn an E2E request into a report a reviewer can trust without rerunning it: each test case (TC) shows its
steps, the screen recording or captures, the API exchanges, and the database rows that prove the outcome.
Execution, environment ownership, cleanup and verdict rules stay with e2e-test-workflow and its components;
this skill adds the TC plan, the evidence capture, the DB verification and the report.
Reference loading: read principles first. Read evidence schema before writing
evidence.json, then route through the KB index: media capture for the browser lane, DB verification for every case with a persisted outcome.
1. Freeze the request and create the evidence directory
Record the repository root, revision, requested scope (TC IDs, areas or all) and lanes (api, browser).
Create the run's evidence directory outside the repository with mktemp -d "${TMPDIR:-/tmp}/vulpora-e2e-evidence.XXXXXX".
Every artifact of this skill — plan, overlay config, raw outputs, evidence.json, the rendered report — lives there.
Never write report files into the repository, and never reuse a directory from an earlier run.
2. Establish the TC plan before execution
Build tc-plan.md in the evidence directory from the repository's source of truth, in this order:
- the existing E2E scenario catalog (
e2e-scenario-author, validated, not regenerated unless authorized); - the QA browser handoff (
qa-test-designer) for UI flows; - when neither covers the request, draft TCs from the code's endpoints and screens, mark them
DRAFT, and stop for the user's approval before running them.
Each TC states: ID, priority (P0–P2), lane, Given/When/Then, the visible or API result expected, and the DB assertion: which rows the case must create, change or leave untouched, expressed as a read-only query scoped by the case's own run-namespace identifiers, plus the expected rows. A TC whose outcome is persisted but has no DB assertion is incomplete; add one or record why the outcome is not observable in the database.
3. Run through e2e-test-workflow with evidence capture
Invoke e2e-test-workflow with the approved TCs and lanes. It owns the run environment, execution, cleanup, teardown
and verdict. Add only these capture rules:
- Browser lane: generate the run-owned config overlay with
node <skill>/scripts/write-playwright-evidence-config.js --repo <repo> --evidence-dir <dir>and pass the printed config to theplaywright-e2ecommand (--config <overlay>). It imports the repository config unchanged and records video and a screenshot for every test, retries 0, with output under the evidence directory (playwright-e2ePW-7 evidence mode). Addtest.stepnames that match the TC steps and attach a full-page screenshot at each checkpoint the TC names. - API lane: keep the runner's request/response captures (masked) for every exchange the TC makes.
- DB verification, per case, before its cleanup: run each TC's DB assertion against the run-owned database
from the workflow's
environment.jsononly, inside a read-only transaction, with the case's identifiers in the predicate and a row cap. Record query, expected rows, actual rows andPASS/FAIL. Then let cleanup and the absence probe run as usual. The DB verification topic has the exact guard rails.
A DB assertion failure makes the case FAIL even when the screen or API looked right. Never point a query at a shared,
staging or production database, never write through the verification connection, and never widen a predicate to
make a check pass.
4. Assemble evidence.json and render
Write evidence.json in the evidence directory per the evidence schema. Copy each
case's statuses from the workflow output; do not upgrade any status. Reference media by paths relative to the evidence
directory (Playwright writes them under playwright-output/). Then render into an empty sub-directory:
node <skill>/scripts/render-evidence-report.js --evidence <dir>/evidence.json --out <dir>/reportThe renderer refuses a malformed file, a non-read-only query, a PASS case whose DB check or cleanup is not PASS, a
browser PASS without a video, and media outside the evidence directory. Fix the evidence, not the renderer. It copies
media into report/assets/, masks secrets and personal data again, and writes report/index.html (Korean UI, works
offline, no external resources).
5. Report
Return: the report path (<dir>/report/index.html), the overall verdict and per-status counts from the renderer, DB
checks passed / total, videos and screenshots captured, the workflow's lifecycle evidence (cleanup, teardown, orphan
audit), and every gap (blocked lanes, missing media, TCs without DB assertions). Do not open a browser. Tell the user
the directory is temporary and is removed by the OS or by them; it is not committed.
Stop conditions
- No approved TC plan → stop after drafting it.
e2e-test-workflowreturnsBLOCKEDfor a requested lane → report it; do not substitute another runner.- The database in
environment.jsonis not run-owned, or the case identifiers are unknown → DB checks areNOT_RUNand the case cannot bePASS. - The renderer rejects the evidence twice for the same reason → stop and report the validation errors.
In this repository65 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-evalSkill
- architecture-review-workflowSkill
- backend-code-review-workflowSkill
- code-authoring-routerSkill
- code-diagram-extractSkill
- codex-agent-runtimeSkill
- design-pattern-applySkill
- diagram-stylerSkill
- document-designerSkill
- e2e-report-rendererSkill
- e2e-runnerSkill
- e2e-scenario-authorSkill
- e2e-test-workflowSkill
- entitySkill
- enumSkill
- explore-dead-codeSkill
- flywaySkill
- git-flowSkill
- harness-proposeSkill
- harness-refineSkill
- java-spring-review-workflowSkill
- knowledge-auditSkill
- korean-dev-writerSkill
- kotlin-code-authoringSkill
- kotlin-spring-reviewSkill
- kotlin-spring-review-workflowSkill
- learnSkill
- mapperSkill
- markdown-publisherSkill
- mermaid-diagramsSkill
- mssql-code-authoringSkill
- nl-sql-querySkill
- notion-domain-contextSkill
- oop-design-reviewSkill
- opensearch-code-authoringSkill
- opensearch-optimizationSkill
- opensearch-query-reviewSkill
- opensearch-review-workflowSkill
- opensearch-schema-reviewSkill
- pdf-qaSkill
- playwright-e2eSkill
- postgres-code-authoringSkill
- postgres-query-reviewSkill
- postgres-review-workflowSkill
- postgres-risk-checkSkill
- postgres-schema-designSkill
- product-requirementsSkill
- product-ui-designSkill
- refactoring-catalogSkill
- repositorySkill
- requestSkill
- responseSkill
- retroSkill
- schema-doc-extractSkill
- security-scan-workflowSkill
- serviceSkill
- skill-updaterSkill
- start-taskSkill
- test-authoringSkill
- test-quality-refactoring-workflowSkill
- The first 60 shown.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

