Menu
End-to-end test planning for critical user journeys across integrated systems. Use when release confidence depends on browser/API/dependency behavior as one flow; do not use for isolated unit behavior or pure contract checks.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
| name | testing-e2e |
| description | End-to-end test planning for critical user journeys across integrated systems. Use when release confidence depends on browser/API/dependency behavior as one flow; do not use for isolated unit behavior or pure contract checks. |
Use this skill to validate business-critical journeys under integrated runtime conditions.
Validate checkout flow across UI, API, and payment integration.Define minimum critical E2E regression set before release.Prove no fatal breakage in top user journeys.testing-unit).testing-contract).assets/critical-journey-template.md.references/trigger-and-examples.md: trigger patterns, anti-patterns, and deliverable expectations.assets/critical-journey-template.md: concise template for critical-path E2E scenario definition and evidence capture.Systematic debugging workflow for isolating software root causes, implementing proportional fixes, and verifying recovery with reproducible evidence. Use when application/runtime failures, regressions, or flaky behavior are observed and the task requires both diagnosis and remediation. When specialized skills are available in the environment, defer GitHub Actions failure triage to `github-fix-ci`, commit-introduction isolation to `git-bisect-debugging`, profiler-led hotspot analysis to `performance-profiling`, active security incident command to `security-incident-response`, and postmortem-only reporting to `incident-postmortem`. Do not use for broad feature implementation or speculative hardening without evidence.
Resource-oriented REST/OpenAPI contract design for URI/method semantics, idempotency, pagination, and HTTP status behavior. Trigger when REST contract diffs are detected in paths, methods, schemas, or status semantics, or when request-response transport choice is still unresolved before implementation. Do not use for GraphQL schema authoring, error-taxonomy-only changes, version lifecycle governance, or consumer-provider contract test implementation.
Controlled online experiment workflow for product changes with causal inference, randomization integrity checks, and pre-registered decision criteria. Trigger when ship/no-ship decisions require causal evidence under uncertainty and KPI trade-offs must be quantified. Do not use for feature-flag rollout policy without experiment design, deterministic functional verification, or observability-only analysis.
Provider-consumer compatibility testing for service interface changes. Use when APIs or event schemas evolve and executable contract checks must guard compatibility before release; do not use for UI-only validation or architecture topology decisions.
Risk-based regression suite curation for release gating under time and budget limits. Use when teams must decide what runs always versus conditionally by impact and risk; do not use for implementing a single test type in isolation.
Design executable acceptance criteria for approved requirements by converting goals/specs into binary pass/fail checks with observable outcomes. Use when implementation handoff, QA validation, or release decisions need testable criteria for stable `REQ-*`/`NFR-*` baselines; do not use for requirement discovery, prioritization, or sprint slicing.