discover-abtests

name	discover-abtests
description	Crawl a website and auto-generate .abtest.ts files for shaka-perf visreg visual regression testing. Use this skill whenever the user wants to discover, generate, or scaffold AB tests for a URL — even if they just say "set up tests for localhost:3020", "generate tests for this site", or "create visreg tests".
argument-hint	<url> [depth=2] [output=./ab-tests/] [mode=twin-server|single-server]

discover-abtests

Crawl a target site in Chrome, probe pages interactively to understand their behavior, then generate validated .abtest.ts files for shaka-perf visreg.

The goal is to produce tests that actually work — not just syntactically valid files. That's why each page is probed in the browser before writing any code: it avoids generating tests for interactions that don't exist, CSS overrides that don't work, or skeleton waits for elements that never appear.

Bundled resources

The browser-side scripts and report parser ship inside the shaka-perf CLI — invoke them via shaka-perf discover-abtests <subcommand> rather than reading files from this directory.

Command	When to use
shaka-perf discover-abtests extract-links	Prints JS source — capture stdout and pass to javascript_tool to collect internal links from any page
shaka-perf discover-abtests probe-lazy-load	Prints JS source — capture stdout and pass to javascript_tool to test whether scrolling triggers new content
shaka-perf discover-abtests probe-sections	Prints JS source — capture stdout and pass to javascript_tool on tall pages (>2000px) to score candidate CSS selectors
shaka-perf discover-abtests parse-report [path]	Run after compare to summarize pass/fail, diff %, whitespace metrics, and engine errors (defaults to visreg_data/html_report/report.json)
references/patterns.md	Read when writing .abtest.ts files — contains code patterns and selector strategy
references/api.md	Read when you need the full abTest() config API or helpers reference

Read the reference docs as needed rather than trying to keep the full details in mind. The patterns and API reference are too detailed to hold mentally — just load them.

Inputs

Parse from the user's message:

• URL — required (normalize bare domains like printivity.com → http://printivity.com)
• depth — default 2. Depth 1 = starting page only; depth 2 = starting page + linked pages; depth 3 = one more level out
• output directory — default ./ab-tests/
• concurrency — default 4. Number of browser tabs for parallel link extraction in Phase 1.
• mode — default twin-server. Controls how tests run:
  • twin-server — compares control (e.g. localhost:3020) vs experiment (e.g. localhost:3030)
  • single-server — both --controlURL and --experimentURL set to the same URL; validates test structure without a real A/B pair

If no URL was provided, ask for it before proceeding.

---

Phase 1: Crawl (links only)

Load mcp__claude-in-chrome__tabs_context_mcp first to get a tab, then navigate to the URL.

This phase ONLY extracts links — no probing, no testing. The goal is to build a list of pages to process.

Maintain throughout:

• visited: set of paths already link-extracted
• queue: [{ path, depth }], initialized with [{ path: '/', depth: 1 }]
• pageList: ordered list of unique paths to process in Phase 2

Process the queue in BFS order, up to concurrency pages in parallel:

1. Dequeue up to concurrency entries not yet visited.
2. Open each in its own tab (tabs_create_mcp for tabs 2–N; reuse existing for first).
3. For each: navigate, mark visited, capture shaka-perf discover-abtests extract-links and pass its stdout to javascript_tool. If depth < crawlDepth, enqueue new paths as { path, depth: depth + 1 }.
4. Close extra tabs after each batch.

Hard limits: max 40 unique paths.

Skip only these:

• External URLs (different hostname)
• Non-page paths: tel:, mailto:, anchors-only (#section)
• Admin panels (e.g. /admin — but go to /login normally)
• Auth callbacks (/auth/callback, /oauth)
• API routes (/api/, .json endpoints)
• Paginated duplicates (/products?page=2 when /products is already queued)
• Pages that require authentication — check by navigating; if it redirects to login, skip

Do not skip pages just because they seem "boring" or static.

---

Phase 2: Per-page loop

Process pages from pageList one at a time, sequentially. For each page, complete all five steps (A → B → C → D → E) before moving to the next page.

Maintain across pages:

• claimedSections: map of selector → path — when a section appears on multiple pages, only the first page to claim it gets a test for it
• knownLoadingSelectors: set of CSS selectors for spinners/skeletons/loading indicators discovered on any page so far. Grows as new ones are found.

Step A — Probe the page

Navigate to the page in Chrome. Complete all probing steps in sequence before writing any code.

A1. Check for lazy-loaded content (always, every page): Capture shaka-perf discover-abtests probe-lazy-load and pass its stdout to javascript_tool. Wait for networkidle first — probing during an in-flight API call gives false results. Then scroll incrementally using real mouse scroll actions (not window.scrollTo in JS) — IntersectionObserver-based lazy loaders only fire on genuine scroll events. Scroll 10 ticks at a time via mcp__claude-in-chrome__scroll, wait 500ms between each, until window.scrollY + window.innerHeight >= document.body.scrollHeight. Wait 2 more seconds, compare image count and scroll height to baseline. Record the result.

A2. Wait for loading indicators to clear (always, every page): Check for spinners, skeleton screens, loading indicators. Use javascript_tool to look for: aria-label="Loading", role="progressbar", class names containing skeleton, spinner, loading, placeholder. Add any found to knownLoadingSelectors and wait for them to disappear. Also check all selectors already in knownLoadingSelectors. Do not proceed until all loading indicators are gone.

A3. CSS animation overrides (if you see moving elements): inject via javascript_tool and screenshot to confirm it stopped. Only include in tests if the screenshot shows the element frozen.

A4. Page sections: run document.body.scrollHeight (after real scrolling in A1). If >~2000px, use both strategies to find the best CSS selectors for section-based testing:

Strategy 1 — Algorithmic probe: Capture shaka-perf discover-abtests probe-sections and pass its stdout to javascript_tool. It walks the DOM from the layout root, scores elements by size (100-800px = best), width, depth, semantic class name, heading inclusion, content density, and uniqueness. Returns up to 15 scored candidates with overlap removed. Elements >1000px tall are deprioritized so their children get picked instead.

Strategy 2 — AI visual analysis: Scroll through the page and identify the natural visual sections a user would recognize — hero, content blocks, sidebars, forms, navigation, footer. For each, find the closest DOM element that wraps it. Evaluate: "If I capture just this element, will the screenshot show a recognizable, self-contained piece of UI?"

Merge and evaluate candidates from both strategies:

• Default: include. Every scored candidate should get a test. Only skip a section if it is structurally empty — meaning 0 children, 0 textContent, and 0 images (e.g., an empty <div> placeholder with no iframe or canvas). Sections showing "empty state" UI (like "Reviews (0)" with a button) are real UI and should be tested.
• A good section passes the "would a designer draw a box here?" test — it's a natural visual block
• A good section includes its heading — if an <h2> sits above the candidate, try the parent instead
• A good section "tells a story" — the screenshot makes sense on its own ("Amenities: WiFi, Pool" tells a story; a blank rectangle does not)
• If an element has near-zero textContent but children have content, it's a wrapper — go one level deeper
• Aim for sections covering 70%+ of page height — use as many sections as needed
• For sidebar elements (position:absolute/sticky, widthRatio < 0.5), plan desktop-only tests
• For elements hidden on some viewports, add viewports override

A5–A7 are not optional. Interaction tests (clicking buttons, filling forms, opening modals) are just as important as section snapshots — they catch regressions in dynamic behavior that static screenshots miss. A page with 5 section snapshots and 0 interaction tests has a coverage gap.

A5. Catalog interactive elements: use javascript_tool to find all clickable/interactive elements on the page. Query for button, a[href] (non-navigation), input, select, textarea, [role="tab"], [aria-expanded], [data-toggle], .btn, etc. Record each with its selector, visible text, and location on the page.

A6. Test interactions: click each interactive element in Chrome and document what happens:

• Button opens a modal or drawer? → record the modal's content and selectors

• Checkbox changes visible state? → record

• Button scrolls? → record

• Button does something visible? → record

• Tab reveals content or scrolls? → record

• Anything produces validation errors? → record

• Link navigates to another page? → record the destination (but don't write a navigation test — the destination page gets its own tests)

• Form inputs found? → this is important. For every form on the page (whether inline or inside a modal), record ALL input fields with their selectors, types, labels, and what values to fill them with. This includes:

  • Text inputs (input[type="text"], input[name="..."])
  • Date/calendar inputs (date pickers, input[type="date"], calendar widgets)
  • Number inputs (input[type="number"], guest counters with +/- buttons)
  • Dropdowns (select, custom dropdowns)
  • Textareas
  • Checkboxes and radio buttons

  Try filling them during probing — actually type values into inputs, select dates on calendars, increment number fields, check checkboxes. This confirms what works and what doesn't before you write test code.

  Fill before clicking action buttons. When a form has both inputs and a submit/action button (like "Book Now", "Search", "Apply"), the right test sequence is: fill all inputs first → capture the filled state → then click the button. A test that clicks "Book Now" without filling in dates and guests misses the most interesting UI state (the populated form) and may also miss validation behavior.

A7. Probe inside modals/expanded UI: when clicking reveals new UI (modal, drawer, expanded panel), probe THAT UI for its own interactive elements — buttons, forms, links within the modal. Keep going as long as new testable UI appears. For each form inside a modal, record all fields so you can write a form-fill test in Step B.

For every confirmed interaction, plan a test. For every form found, plan three tests:

1. A "click to open" test (snapshot of the modal/panel appearing)
2. A "fill the form" test (populate all fields, capture the filled state)
3. A "submit" test if there's a submit button (fill fields → click submit → capture the result)

This applies to inline forms too (forms that are already visible on the page without clicking anything). A booking form with date pickers and guest selectors, a search form with filters, a contact form — these all need fill tests. The filled state of a form is valuable test coverage because it exercises input rendering, validation UI, and date/number formatting.

A8. Check responsive behavior — this step is mandatory, not optional. Without it you'll write tests that fail on mobile (selector doesn't exist) or miss mobile-only UI entirely. Every page gets A8, no exceptions.

After completing desktop probing (A1-A7), resize the browser to mobile width and re-probe:

1. Resize to 375×667 via mcp__claude-in-chrome__resize_window
2. Take a screenshot and scroll through the mobile layout — visually note what's different from desktop (stacked columns, hidden sidebars, hamburger menus, mobile-specific UI)
3. Re-run shaka-perf discover-abtests probe-sections (via javascript_tool) at this width
4. Check each desktop selector from A4 — does it exist on mobile? Use javascript_tool to query visibility:

   const el = document.querySelector('.rate-form-wrapper');
   el ? { display: getComputedStyle(el).display, height: el.getBoundingClientRect().height } : 'NOT FOUND'
   

5. Compare desktop vs mobile sections:
   • Desktop selector hidden/absent on mobile → restrict that test to viewports: [tablet, desktop] or [desktop]. Check if there's a mobile-specific replacement (e.g., .mobile-nav replaces .nav-tabs). If a replacement exists, plan a mobile-only test for it.
   • New element on mobile not seen on desktop → plan a mobile-only test for it
   • Same selector, different dimensions → note for threshold adjustment
6. Check interactive elements at mobile width — buttons/menus that appear only on mobile (hamburger menu, mobile filters, etc.)
7. Resize back to desktop width when done

Gate: before proceeding to A9, write down what you found — even if the answer is "mobile layout is identical, no differences found." If you can't describe what the mobile layout looks like, you haven't done A8.

A9. Record findings for this page:

• Path, human-readable name
• data-cy attributes, ids, and stable structural landmarks
• Skeleton/spinner CSS selectors to wait for
• Which interactions were confirmed working vs. tried and failed
• What new UI appeared from interactions (modals, drawers, expanded sections) and what's inside them
• Whether lazy load was confirmed (from A1), loading indicators found (from A2), any animations
• A8 mobile findings (required): list of desktop-only selectors, mobile-only selectors, mobile replacement elements, and a one-line summary of what the mobile layout looks like. If A8 found no differences, state that explicitly.
• Shared section deduplication: for each selector, check claimedSections:
  • Not claimed → add to this page's plan, register it
  • Already claimed → exclude, record { selector, skippedOn, alreadyCoveredBy }
• Product/detail pages: only claim the unique top section (configurator, carousel). Don't claim shared lower sections (reviews, FAQ, footer).

Step B — Write TODO comments with all probing findings

Read references/patterns.md (per-scenario code patterns) and ../assess-abtest-quality/SKILL.md (the non-negotiable test code rules) before writing any test code. The rules in one line: tests must fail loudly and run linearly — no try/catch swallowing, no loops, no if-branching on page state (assert with waitForSelector/waitForURL instead), wait for conditions not the clock, deterministic inputs, each test independent.

Create/open the .abtest.ts file for this page (e.g., homepage.abtest.ts). Write abTest() stubs with // TODO: comments describing each planned test. Document ALL findings from probing so nothing is lost:

import { abTest } from 'shaka-shared';
import { waitUntilPageSettled } from 'shaka-perf/visreg/helpers';

// TODO: Hero section snapshot
// - selector: [data-cy="hero"] or .hero-section
// - wait for: .skeleton (found in A2) to disappear
// - threshold: 0.05 (dynamic hero image)
abTest('Homepage Hero', { startingPath: '/', options: { visreg: {} } }, async () => {});

// TODO: Click "Contact Us" button → modal opens
// - confirmed in A6: clicking button.contact-cta opens modal .contact-modal
// - inside modal (A7): form with name, email, message fields
// - .contact-cta is display:none on mobile viewport (A8)
// - need desktop-only viewports
abTest('Homepage Contact Modal', { startingPath: '/', options: { visreg: {} } }, async () => {});

// TODO: Fill contact form inside modal
// - fields: input[name="name"], input[name="email"], textarea[name="message"]
// - depends on: opening the modal first (chained interaction)
abTest('Homepage Contact Form Fill', { startingPath: '/', options: { visreg: {} } }, async () => {});

Before moving to Step C, verify every category below has at least one TODO stub (or an explicit "none found" note). This is a gate — do not proceed until you've checked each one:

1. Section snapshots — hero, key content sections, footer (from A4)
2. Click interactions — every button/tab confirmed working in A6 gets a test
3. Modals/drawers — every modal opened in A6-A7 gets a "click to open" snapshot test
4. Form fills — every form on the page (inline or inside modals) gets a test that fills ALL its inputs and captures the populated state. This means: text fields get filled, dates get selected, number fields get incremented, dropdowns get opened and a value selected, checkboxes get checked. If a form has a submit button, there should also be a test that fills the form and then clicks submit. A booking form without a "fill dates and guests" test is a coverage gap.
5. Viewport-specific from A8 — any desktop-only selectors must have viewports restricting them away from mobile. Any mobile-only elements found in A8 get a mobile-only test. If A8 found no mobile-specific elements, write "A8: no mobile-specific elements found" as a comment in the file.

Threshold guidance

• 0.01 — static content (legal pages, about text, documentation)
• 0.05 — standard pages (hero images, structured layouts)
• 0.1 — highly dynamic content (listing cards, deal cards, pages with varying image counts)

Never raise a threshold to hide a real failure — fix the root cause.

Annotation

Always call annotate('description') immediately before each action. When a test fails, the report shows "Failed while <description>" — without annotations the error is a raw stack trace.

Annotate waits, clicks, scrolls, fills, and state changes. Don't annotate every trivial await.

Step C — Implement and validate tests one at a time

Implement each TODO stub directly in the real .abtest.ts file, then validate it using --filter to run only that test by name:

1. Implement the TODO stub — replace the empty async () => {} with the real test body

2. Run with --filter to execute only this test (the filter is a regex matched against the test name):

   Twin-server mode:

   cd <app-directory> && yarn shaka-perf visreg-compare --testFile ab-tests/<page>.abtest.ts --filter "Homepage Hero"
   

   Single-server mode:

   cd <app-directory> && yarn shaka-perf visreg-compare --testFile ab-tests/<page>.abtest.ts --filter "Homepage Hero" --controlURL <url> --experimentURL <url>
   

3. Quick check: read the screenshot to verify real content was captured (not blank)

4. If pass → move on to the next TODO stub

5. If fail → debug and fix (up to 3 attempts). If still failing, comment out the abTest() call (don't delete it) and add a // TODO: comment explaining what's broken and what was tried. This preserves the test code so it's easy to revisit later.

Important: shaka-perf visreg must be run from the directory containing visreg.config.ts. If the user specified an app directory, cd there first.

After every test run, execute these checks:

1. Parse report.json (includes whitespace and error detection):

shaka-perf discover-abtests parse-report

This prints status, diff%, whitespace%, and engine errors per test. Act on these flags:

• HIGH-WHITE (whitePixelPercent > 90%) → selector likely captures empty space. Re-evaluate: try a child element, a sibling, or a different section entirely. Always read the screenshot to confirm — a 30px property-specs strip can be 94% white yet "pass" since both servers captured the same tiny fragment.
• ENGINE-ERR → check engineErrorMsg. Common: clip.width = 0 means element has no width at this viewport — add viewports override to exclude that breakpoint.
• BOT70W = true → content concentrated at top of element; bottom is empty. Consider a tighter selector.

A test that passes (0 diff) can still be broken if both control and experiment captured blank/useless content. The whitePixelPercent field catches this — high whitespace on a passing test means the selector is wrong.

2. Inspect screenshots visually — use the Read tool on .png files:

• visreg_data/html_report/experiment_screenshot/
• visreg_data/html_report/reference_screenshot/
• visreg_data/html_report/experiment_screenshot/failed_diff_*.png

Always look at screenshots before deciding on a fix. Do not rely on diff percentage alone.

Step D — Full-file validation

After all TODO stubs are implemented:

1. Run shaka-perf visreg-compare --testFile ab-tests/<page>.abtest.ts with ALL tests in the file
2. Run parse-report.py and check for HIGH-WHITE / ENGINE-ERR flags
3. If tests that passed individually now fail in combination → debug and fix (timing issues, shared state, etc.)

Step E — Coverage comparison (loop until covered)

1. Open the visreg HTML report (visreg_data/html_report/index.html) in Chrome
2. Open the live page in another Chrome tab
3. Go through the report images and compare with the live page to find:
   • Missing page sections (important content not captured by any test)
   • Missing interactions (buttons, forms, modals that should be tested but aren't)
   • Blank or mostly-white screenshots (missing lazy content)
4. If gaps found → go back to Step B: add new TODO stubs for the missing coverage, then implement them through Steps C-D, and repeat Step E
5. If coverage is satisfactory → move to the next page

Acceptance criteria

A test only counts as PASS when all of the following are met:

#	Criterion	Fix if failing
1	No loading indicators (spinners, skeletons) visible	Add waitForLoadState('networkidle') and/or waitUntilPageSettled
2	No mid-animation carousels — frames frozen at deterministic position	Add CSS override confirmed in probing
3	No missing lazy-loaded content	Add scroll + networkidle + scroll-to-top. Blank screenshot check is ground truth — add scrolling even if probing didn't detect it
4	Thresholds appropriate — 0.01 static, 0.05 dynamic, 0.1 very dynamic	Fix root cause
5	All selectors resolve without timeout	Inspect DOM in Chrome, use a more reliable selector
6	Every non-trivial action is annotated	Add missing annotate(...) calls
7	No auth-gated content (login page/access denied in screenshot)	Remove the test
8	No unconfirmed interactions — every click/scroll/CSS override validated in probing	Remove unconfirmed action
9	No high-whitespace screenshots (whitePixelPercent < 90 in report.json)	Re-evaluate selector: try child element, parent, or different section. Read screenshot to verify.

Before attempting any fix, look at the diff screenshot. Two failure types:

1. Test infrastructure failure — broken test. Fix it.
2. Real A/B difference — test is working correctly. Don't fix — mark PASS (A/B diff).

Common fixes

Symptom	Fix
UI change on one server only	Real A/B diff — mark PASS (A/B diff), do not raise threshold
Skeleton/spinner visible	waitForLoadState('networkidle')
Content missing (lazy)	scroll + networkidle + scroll-to-top
Carousel moving	CSS override from probing
Selector timeout	Inspect DOM in Chrome, use more reliable selector
High diff on dynamic content	hideSelectors/removeSelectors or wait for settle — do not raise threshold
Selector not found on some viewports	Element is display:none at that breakpoint — split into viewport-scoped tests (see patterns.md)
High whitespace (whitePixelPercent > 90%)	Wrong selector — try child, parent, or different section. Read screenshot to verify.
Cannot type text into input[type=number]	Use numeric-only strings: '5551234567' not '555-123-4567'
button:has-text("X") matches multiple	Use page.getByLabel(), page.getByRole(), or more specific CSS selector
Timeout 60000ms on page.goto	Server too slow — page takes too long to respond
size: isDifferent	Dynamic content changes height between renders; often unfixable in single-server mode, mark NEEDS REVIEW
strict mode violation	Multiple elements match — use .first() or more specific selector

---

Final summary

After all files are validated, print the report below and write it to {output}/DISCOVERY_REPORT.md.

The "Coverage decisions" section is important — it makes deduplication reasoning transparent so the user can verify nothing was accidentally omitted.

## Discovered AB Tests

| File               | Tests | Status          | Notes                              |
| ------------------ | ----- | --------------- | ---------------------------------- |
| homepage.abtest.ts | 2     | PASS            |                                    |
| cart.abtest.ts     | 1     | PASS (A/B diff) | Experiment has new checkout button |
| products.abtest.ts | 1     | NEEDS REVIEW    | Selector timeout on mobile viewport |

Statuses:

- **PASS** — no diff, both servers identical
- **PASS (A/B diff)** — test ran correctly and detected a real difference
- **NEEDS REVIEW** — test infrastructure issue (flaky, timeout, broken selector)

Total: N files, M tests (X passing, Y A/B diffs detected, Z needs review)
Output: ./ab-tests/

## Coverage decisions

### Shared sections (tested once)

| Section                    | Tested on            | Skipped on                |
| -------------------------- | -------------------- | ------------------------- |
| `[data-cy="testimonials"]` | `homepage.abtest.ts` | product pages, about page |
| `footer`                   | `homepage.abtest.ts` | all other pages           |

### Pages scoped to unique content only

| Page               | Selector used                      | Reason                                                |
| ------------------ | ---------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------- |
| `/products/widget` | `[data-cy="product-configurator"]` | Lower sections covered by representative product page |

### Skipped pages

| Path        | Reason               |
| ----------- | -------------------- |
| `/admin`    | Auth required        |
| `/checkout` | Multi-step auth flow |

Then ask: "Would you like me to dig into any failing tests or adjust any of the coverage decisions?"