chrome-validation
Skill1 starsChanged 7 days agoMITView on GitHub
Validate or smoke-test a web feature in Chrome browser with Chrome DevTools MCP.
In this repository5 other files it gives its agents.
- bem-cssSkill
- cleaner-commitsSkill
- create-better-skillSkill
- jest-coverageSkill
- web-accessibilitySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Ask for anything missing, in one batch:
- Distinctive: line 27
Read the workspace and app instructions only as far as needed to reach the feature.
- Distinctive: line 30
Use visible text, roles, and labels — not implementation selectors.
- Distinctive: line 32
Wait for observable state changes, not fixed delays.
- Distinctive: line 34
When a criterion fails, reproduce it once.
- Distinctive: line 72
Keep the report factual and reproducible: exact error text, failing requests, and the last successful step.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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
Chrome Validation
Goal: exercise a feature in a real Chrome session the way a user would, then report PASS, FAIL or BLOCKED with browser evidence.
Step 0 — MCP check
Confirm the Chrome DevTools MCP tools are available. Treat a configured-but-failing or unauthenticated server as unavailable.
If they're missing, abort — don't substitute other tools or write a report. Tell the user to install and complete the setup from https://github.com/ChromeDevTools/chrome-devtools-mcp/ (add the server to their MCP client config — npx -y chrome-devtools-mcp@latest — then restart the session) and re-run this skill once the tools appear.
Step 1 — Inputs
Ask for anything missing, in one batch:
- Feature: feature or user workflow to validate
- URL: starting URL, route, or local app URL
- Acceptance criteria: observable behaviors that must pass
- Viewport or device: optional; default to desktop and note what you used
Step 2 — Validate
- Read the workspace and app instructions only as far as needed to reach the feature. Never modify source, tests, fixtures, or config — validation observes, it doesn't change the app.
- Open the URL or reuse the running app. If it isn't running, find the documented start command and ask the user to start it.
- Exercise each criterion as a user would:
- Use visible text, roles, and labels — not implementation selectors.
- Cover the happy path, relevant empty/loading/error states, and one useful boundary case when it applies.
- Wait for observable state changes, not fixed delays.
- Collect evidence: rendered page and key controls, console errors and warnings, failed requests and status codes, and a screenshot of the final observed state. If validation fails, also capture the failure state when useful.
- When a criterion fails, reproduce it once. Classify it: product defect, environment/setup problem, or unclear requirement — and don't claim a code-level cause without reading the code.
Step 3 — Report
Return this format:
## Result
PASS | FAIL | BLOCKED
## Environment
- URL:
- Viewport/device:
- Browser/session:
## Criteria
| Criterion | Result | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| ... | PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED | ... |
## Diagnostics
- Console:
- Network:
- Relevant UI state:
- Screenshot of final observed state:
- Failure-state screenshot, if applicable:
## Notes
- Reproduction steps for failures or blockers
- Category: product defect / environment/setup / unclear requirement
- Follow-up needed, if anyKeep the report factual and reproducible: exact error text, failing requests, and the last successful step. A clean console is not proof a criterion passed — observe the criteria directly.
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.

