name: playwright-review description: Use when reviewing Playwright BDD test files for quality issues — locally staged/modified files or PR diffs. Triggers on: "review playwright code", "check test quality", "review before commit", staged test changes.

Playwright BDD Code Review

Overview

Structured review process for Playwright BDD test code in this repository. Classifies findings P0–P3, applies framework-specific standards, and produces actionable reports.

When to Use

Before committing test changes
During PR review of test files
After fixing test failures to verify fix quality
When onboarding to understand what "good" looks like

Review Process

Step 1 — Categorize Files

Classify each changed file:

spec — .feature files
page-object — src/pages/*.ts
step-definition — src/steps/*.ts
support — src/utils/*.ts, src/services/**/*.ts, config files

Step 2 — Load Standards

Read both reference files before applying checks:

.claude/references/standards.md — framework architecture standards
.claude/references/anti-patterns.md — full P0–P3 taxonomy with examples

These replace any external documentation. Always read both files fresh — do not rely on memory.

Step 3 — Apply Anti-Pattern Checks

Apply all P0–P3 checks from .claude/references/anti-patterns.md.

Regex patterns to scan for:

P0: waitForTimeout|page\.\$\(|page\.\$\$\(|innerHTML|mock-token|authenticated.*true.*catch
P1: networkidle|module-level.*let.*Page|process\.env\.\w+!
P2: isPageLoaded|LOG_LEVEL_MAP\[.*\];$|apiResponse\?.*unknown
P3: log\.debug.*initialized|Before\(async.*log\.debug|@Sample

Step 4 — Keyword Elevation

Auto-escalate any finding to P0 if the affected code touches: auth, login, password, credentials, token, secret, payment, pii, phi, hipaa, security

Example: A P2 misleading return type in an auth step → P0.

Step 5 — Generate Report

## Playwright BDD Code Review Report

**Files reviewed:** N  
**Critical (P0):** N | **High (P1):** N | **Medium (P2):** N | **Low (P3):** N

---

### 🔴 Critical Issues (P0) — Block Merge

#### [File:Line] Issue Title
**Pattern:** what was found  
**Risk:** why it matters  
**Fix:**
\```typescript
// Before
...
// After
...
\```

---

### 🟠 High Priority (P1) — Should Fix

...

### 🟡 Medium Priority (P2)

...

### 🔵 Low Priority (P3) — Suggestions

...

### ✅ Passed Checks

- [list what was done correctly]

Step 6 — Auto-Fix Guidance

For each P0 finding, provide exact before/after replacement. Reference the auto-fix table in .claude/references/anti-patterns.md.

Quick Reference: Priority Rules

Priority	Action	Blocks Merge?
P0	Must fix	Yes
P1	Should fix (document if deferred)	Recommended
P2	Fix when touching the area	No
P3	Suggestion only	No

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Correct behaviour
Treating P3 as blocking	P3 = suggestion only, never block
Skipping standards files	Always read both reference files fresh
Omitting ✅ Passed Checks section	Always list what passed — builds trust
Reporting issues in untouched code	Only report on changed lines unless P0
Not applying keyword elevation	Auth/payment/PII findings always P0

Integration

Local review: git diff --staged → apply this skill → report in conversation
Full diff review: git diff HEAD → apply this skill
PR review: Get PR diff → apply this skill → post as PR comment