react-testing
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
React component testing with React Testing Library, Vitest/Jest, MSW for network mocking, accessibility assertions with axe, and the decision boundary between component tests and Playwright/Cypress end-to-end runs. Use when writing or fixing tests for React components, hooks, or pages.
19 other projects use a version of this, 4 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- LeahyCC/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ahmadvahidi/skill-atlasword for word, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- conjurer-rich/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillsedited, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- Ronnasayd/aippword for word, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- vguedz/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Other versions19 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 4
- gongyijie85/dsh-ecc★ 8100% same
- NISTALTALSON/essential-claude-skills★ 1100% same
- Ronnasayd/aipp★ 1100% same
- ahmadvahidi/skill-atlas★ 0100% same
Edited · 4
- ronmkr/PromptBook★ 2100% same
- SamuelNDCE/claude-super-skill-library★ 1100% same
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 0100% same
- lintangknitto/agent-skills★ 096% same
Wrote their own version · 11
- getsentry/sentry★ 46ksame name
- nek1987/auto-agent-harness★ 4same name
- LeahyCC/claude-skills★ 3same name
- aps08/fullstack-clean-architecture★ 2same name
- conjurer-rich/skills★ 1same name
- diego-tobalina/vibe-coding★ 1same name
- hkarpinen/agent-skills★ 1same name
- Nupke/react-claude-skills★ 1same name
- vguedz/skills★ 1same name
- EstebanT1112/codex-engineering-workflow★ 0same name
1 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository270 other files it gives its agents.
- accessibilitySkill
- agent-architecture-auditSkill
- agent-evalSkill
- agent-harness-constructionSkill
- agentic-engineeringSkill
- agentic-osSkill
- agent-introspection-debuggingSkill
- agent-payment-x402Skill
- agent-self-evaluationSkill
- agent-sortSkill
- ai-first-engineeringSkill
- ai-regression-testingSkill
- android-clean-architectureSkill
- angular-developerSkill
- api-connector-builderSkill
- api-designSkill
- architecture-decision-recordsSkill
- article-writingSkill
- automation-audit-opsSkill
- autonomous-agent-harnessSkill
- autonomous-loopsSkill
- backend-patternsSkill
- benchmark-methodologySkill
- benchmark-optimization-loopSkill
- benchmarkSkill
- blender-motion-state-inspectionSkill
- blueprintSkill
- brand-discoverySkill
- brand-voiceSkill
- browser-qaSkill
- bun-runtimeSkill
- canary-watchSkill
- carrier-relationship-managementSkill
- cisco-ios-patternsSkill
- ckSkill
- claude-devfleetSkill
- clickhouse-ioSkill
- click-path-auditSkill
- codebase-onboardingSkill
- codehealth-mcpSkill
- code-tourSkill
- coding-standardsSkill
- competitive-platform-analysisSkill
- competitive-report-structureSkill
- compose-multiplatform-patternsSkill
- config-gcSkill
- configure-eccSkill
- connections-optimizerSkill
- content-engineSkill
- content-hash-cache-patternSkill
- context-budgetSkill
- continuous-agent-loopSkill
- continuous-learningSkill
- continuous-learning-v2Skill
- cost-aware-llm-pipelineSkill
- cost-trackingSkill
- councilSkill
- cpp-coding-standardsSkill
- cpp-testingSkill
- crosspostSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.
10
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 24
Test what the user sees and does, not implementation details.
- Very specific: line 91
Always await userEvent calls
- Very specific: line 92
Call userEvent.setup() once per test, reuse the returned user
- Very specific: line 108
Never setTimeout + assertion — flaky.
- Distinctive: line 224
Test through the hook's public API only
- Distinctive: line 239
Run axe in component tests for every interactive component.
- Distinctive: line 255
Test implementation detail (DOM structure), not behavior
- Distinctive: line 269
Run native browser animation, CSS transitions
- Distinctive: line 270
Test scrolling behavior, drag-and-drop, paste from clipboard
- Distinctive: line 272
Run real network in a controlled environment with full DevTools support
- Distinctive: line 332
Write the first test for the simplest case
- Distinctive: line 333
Verify it fails for the right reason
- Distinctive: line 335
Add the next test case
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
React Testing
Comprehensive React testing patterns for behavior-focused component tests, custom hook tests, accessibility assertions, and network-level mocking.
When to Activate
- Writing tests for React components, custom hooks, or pages
- Adding test coverage to legacy untested components
- Migrating from Enzyme or class-component-era patterns to React Testing Library
- Setting up Vitest or Jest for a new React project
- Mocking HTTP requests in tests
- Asserting accessibility violations
- Deciding which tests belong in RTL vs Playwright Component Testing vs full E2E
Core Principle
Test what the user sees and does, not implementation details.
A test should:
- Render the component with the same providers it has in production
- Interact with it via accessible queries (role, label) and
userEvent - Assert visible output and observable side effects (callback fired, request sent)
A test should NOT:
- Inspect component state, props passed to children, or which hooks were called
- Mock React itself or framework hooks
- Assert on the number of renders or DOM structure beyond what affects users
Library Choice
| Runner | When | Note |
| Vitest | Vite, Remix, modern setups | Faster, native ESM, Jest-compatible API |
| Jest | Next.js, CRA, established repos | Default for many React projects |
| Playwright Component Testing | Real browser engine needed | Use when JSDOM lacks the required feature |
| Cypress Component Testing | Real browser, Cypress already in use | Alternative to Playwright CT |
Pick one. Do not run RTL + Vitest AND Playwright CT in the same repo unless you have a clear lane separation.
Query Priority
React Testing Library exposes queries in three tiers — use top-down:
- Accessible to everyone:
getByRole,getByLabelText,getByPlaceholderText,getByText,getByDisplayValue - Semantic:
getByAltText,getByTitle - Test IDs (escape hatch):
getByTestId
// Best
screen.getByRole("button", { name: /save/i });
// OK for inputs
screen.getByLabelText("Email");
// Last resort
screen.getByTestId("save-btn");Variants:
getBy*— throws if no matchqueryBy*— returnsnull(use for "assert absence")findBy*— async, returns a Promise (use for elements that appear after async work)
User Interaction with userEvent
import userEvent from "@testing-library/user-event";
test("submits the form", async () => {
const user = userEvent.setup();
const onSubmit = vi.fn();
render(<UserForm onSubmit={onSubmit} />);
await user.type(screen.getByLabelText("Email"), "user@example.com");
await user.click(screen.getByRole("button", { name: /save/i }));
expect(onSubmit).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ email: "user@example.com" });
});- Always
awaituserEvent calls - Call
userEvent.setup()once per test, reuse the returneduser userEventsimulates a real browser sequence;fireEventdispatches a single synthetic event — preferuserEvent
Async Patterns
// Element that appears after async work
expect(await screen.findByText("Loaded")).toBeInTheDocument();
// Side effect assertion
await waitFor(() => expect(saveSpy).toHaveBeenCalled());
// Element that should disappear
await waitForElementToBeRemoved(() => screen.queryByText("Loading"));Never setTimeout + assertion — flaky. Use the matchers above.
Network Mocking with MSW
Mock Service Worker mocks at the network layer. The component, hooks, and fetch library all behave exactly as in production.
Setup
// test/setup.ts
import { setupServer } from "msw/node";
import { http, HttpResponse } from "msw";
export const handlers = [
http.get("/api/users/:id", ({ params }) =>
HttpResponse.json({ id: params.id, name: "Alice" }),
),
http.post("/api/users", async ({ request }) => {
const body = await request.json();
return HttpResponse.json({ id: "new-id", ...body }, { status: 201 });
}),
];
export const server = setupServer(...handlers);
beforeAll(() => server.listen({ onUnhandledRequest: "error" }));
afterEach(() => server.resetHandlers());
afterAll(() => server.close());Configure onUnhandledRequest: "error" so any unmocked request fails the test loudly — silent passes are worse than red.
Per-test override
test("renders error on 500", async () => {
server.use(
http.get("/api/users/:id", () => new HttpResponse(null, { status: 500 })),
);
render(<UserPage id="1" />);
expect(await screen.findByText(/something went wrong/i)).toBeInTheDocument();
});Provider Wrapping
Wrap providers once in a test-utils.tsx:
// test-utils.tsx
import { render, RenderOptions } from "@testing-library/react";
import { QueryClient, QueryClientProvider } from "@tanstack/react-query";
export function renderWithProviders(
ui: React.ReactElement,
options?: RenderOptions,
) {
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
defaultOptions: { queries: { retry: false } },
});
return render(
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
<ThemeProvider theme={lightTheme}>
<MemoryRouter>{ui}</MemoryRouter>
</ThemeProvider>
</QueryClientProvider>,
options,
);
}
export * from "@testing-library/react";Then import { renderWithProviders, screen } from "test-utils" in every test file.
Custom Hook Testing
import { renderHook, act } from "@testing-library/react";
test("useCounter increments and decrements", () => {
const { result } = renderHook(() => useCounter(0));
expect(result.current.count).toBe(0);
act(() => result.current.increment());
expect(result.current.count).toBe(1);
act(() => result.current.decrement());
expect(result.current.count).toBe(0);
});
test("useCounter accepts initial value", () => {
const { result } = renderHook(() => useCounter(10));
expect(result.current.count).toBe(10);
});
test("useUser fetches user data", async () => {
// Instantiate QueryClient ONCE per test outside the wrapper so it survives re-renders.
// Creating it inside the wrapper closure resets cache state on every render, producing flaky tests.
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
defaultOptions: { queries: { retry: false } },
});
const wrapper = ({ children }: { children: React.ReactNode }) => (
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>{children}</QueryClientProvider>
);
const { result } = renderHook(() => useUser("1"), { wrapper });
await waitFor(() => expect(result.current.isSuccess).toBe(true));
expect(result.current.data).toEqual({ id: "1", name: "Alice" });
});- Wrap state-changing calls in
act - Test through the hook's public API only
- For hooks that use context, pass a
wrapper
Accessibility Assertions
import { axe, toHaveNoViolations } from "jest-axe"; // or vitest-axe
expect.extend(toHaveNoViolations);
test("UserCard has no a11y violations", async () => {
const { container } = render(<UserCard user={mockUser} />);
expect(await axe(container)).toHaveNoViolations();
});Run axe in component tests for every interactive component. Catches:
- Missing labels on form inputs
- Invalid ARIA usage
- Poor color contrast (limited — JSDOM has no real CSS engine, so this works for inline styles only; visual contrast belongs in Playwright)
- Missing alt text on images
- Heading order violations
Cross-link: skills/accessibility/SKILL.md for the broader a11y testing playbook.
When NOT to Use Snapshot Tests
Snapshots of rendered output:
- Break on every styling change
- Get rubber-stamped during review
- Test implementation detail (DOM structure), not behavior
Acceptable snapshot uses:
- Pure data serialization functions (
formatInvoice(invoice)-> stable string) - Generated config files (e.g., webpack config output)
For visual regression on components, use Playwright/Cypress screenshots or Percy/Chromatic — actual visual diffs, not DOM strings.
When to Reach for Playwright / Cypress
JSDOM (used by Vitest/Jest) cannot:
- Render real layout (flexbox, grid, viewport queries)
- Run native browser animation, CSS transitions
- Test scrolling behavior, drag-and-drop, paste from clipboard
- Handle iframes, popups, downloads, cross-origin flows
- Run real network in a controlled environment with full DevTools support
For any of those, use Playwright Component Testing (component test in real browser) or full E2E. See e2e-testing skill.
Decision boundary:
- A hook, a presentational component, a form with logic -> RTL
- A component whose layout matters or that uses browser APIs not in JSDOM -> Playwright CT
- A full user flow across multiple pages -> Playwright/Cypress E2E
Coverage Targets
| Layer | Target |
| Pure utilities | >=90% |
| Custom hooks | >=85% |
| Presentational components | >=80% — behavior, not lines |
| Container components | >=70% — golden paths + error states |
| Pages | E2E covered separately; smoke test minimum |
Configure via vitest.config.ts / jest.config.js:
// vitest.config.ts
test: {
coverage: {
provider: "v8",
reporter: ["text", "html", "lcov"],
thresholds: {
lines: 80,
functions: 80,
branches: 70,
statements: 80,
},
},
}Anti-Patterns
container.querySelector("...")— bypasses accessibility queries, lets tests pass when real users would fail- Asserting on number of renders — implementation detail
jest.mock("react", ...)— never mock React. Refactor the component instead- Mocking child components by default — tests the integration, not isolation. Mock only when the child has heavy side effects
- Ignoring
act()warnings — they signal real bugs (state update after unmount, missing async wrapping) - Sharing mutable state across tests — flakes when test order changes
- Tests that pass with
it.skip()removed — your test does not actually assert what you think
TDD Workflow
RED -> Write failing test for the next requirement
GREEN -> Write minimal component code to pass
REFACTOR -> Improve the component, tests stay green
REPEAT -> Next requirementFor new components:
- Define the component's prop type and signature
- Write the first test for the simplest case
- Verify it fails for the right reason
- Implement just enough to pass
- Add the next test case
- Refactor when the third similar test reveals a pattern
Test Commands
# Vitest
vitest # watch
vitest run # one-shot
vitest run --coverage # with coverage
vitest run path/to/file.test.tsx # single file
# Jest
jest --watch
jest --coverage
jest path/to/file.test.tsx
# CI mode
CI=true vitest run --coverageRelated
- Rules: rules/react/testing.md
- Skills: react-patterns, accessibility, e2e-testing, tdd-workflow
- Agents:
react-reviewer(reviews test quality during code review),tdd-guide(enforces TDD process) - Commands:
/react-test,/react-review
Examples
Form submission with MSW and userEvent
test("submits user form and shows success", async () => {
server.use(
http.post("/api/users", () =>
HttpResponse.json({ id: "1", name: "Alice" }, { status: 201 }),
),
);
const user = userEvent.setup();
renderWithProviders(<UserForm />);
await user.type(screen.getByLabelText("Name"), "Alice");
await user.type(screen.getByLabelText("Email"), "alice@example.com");
await user.click(screen.getByRole("button", { name: /save/i }));
expect(await screen.findByText(/saved successfully/i)).toBeInTheDocument();
});Testing an error boundary
function Broken() {
throw new Error("boom");
}
test("error boundary renders fallback", () => {
// Suppress React's console.error noise for the expected throw, then restore so
// the spy does not leak across tests and hide real errors elsewhere.
const errorSpy = vi.spyOn(console, "error").mockImplementation(() => {});
try {
render(
<ErrorBoundary fallback={<div>Something went wrong</div>}>
<Broken />
</ErrorBoundary>,
);
expect(screen.getByText("Something went wrong")).toBeInTheDocument();
} finally {
errorSpy.mockRestore();
}
});Testing a Suspense boundary
test("shows loading then content", async () => {
renderWithProviders(
<Suspense fallback={<div>Loading...</div>}>
<UserDetail id="1" />
</Suspense>,
);
expect(screen.getByText("Loading...")).toBeInTheDocument();
expect(await screen.findByText("Alice")).toBeInTheDocument();
});Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

