| name | create-test-plan |
| description | Analyze what changed and generate a structured test plan at .turbo/test-plans/<slug>.md covering four escalating levels: basic functionality, complex operations, adversarial testing, and cross-cutting scenarios. Use when the user asks to "create a test plan", "plan tests", "what should I test", "generate test scenarios", "test plan for this PR", or "what are the test cases". |
Create Test Plan
Analyze what changed and generate a comprehensive test plan covering four escalating levels of testing depth.
Step 1: Determine Scope
Resolve scope using the first match:
- User-specified — the user says what to test. Use that.
- PR — a PR URL or number is provided. Fetch the PR details (title, description, changed files, comments) and read the changed code.
- Conversation context — prior conversation contains recent work (a feature, fix, or refactor). Extract what changed, where it lives, and expected behavior.
- App-level discovery — fresh context with no prior work. Examine the project (entry points, routes, commands, README) to identify the app's core user-facing flows.
Step 2: Determine Testing Approach
Always check for project-specific testing skills or MCP tools first. Use the fallbacks below when nothing project-specific is available:
- Web app →
$agent-browser skill if available, otherwise Codex browser automation
- UI/native app →
computer-use MCP
- CLI tool → direct terminal execution
- Library with no entry point → report that interactive testing is not applicable and stop
Step 3: Resolve the Output Path
Pick a slug for the test plan from the change under test:
- Lowercase
- Replace non-alphanumeric characters with hyphens
- Collapse consecutive hyphens
- Trim leading and trailing hyphens
- Truncate to 40 characters at a word boundary
If the work is anchored to an existing artifact (a plan at .turbo/plans/<slug>.md, a shell at .turbo/shells/<slug>.md, or a spec at .turbo/specs/<slug>.md), reuse that artifact's slug verbatim.
The user may pass an explicit slug or path; honor it.
If .turbo/test-plans/<slug>.md already exists, use request_user_input to ask whether to overwrite, append a numeric suffix (-2, -3, ...), or pick a different slug. For a slug reused from an anchoring artifact, offer overwrite or a different slug only.
State the chosen slug and the resulting test plan path before continuing.
Step 4: Analyze the Change
After identifying scope, read the actual code in depth to understand:
- What was added, modified, or removed
- Expected behavior (from PR descriptions, comments, commit messages, or specs)
- Assumptions the implementation makes
- Error paths and edge cases
- Other features or components that could be affected
Step 5: Generate the Test Plan
For each level, generate specific, actionable test scenarios tailored to the actual change. Each scenario needs exact steps and an expected outcome.
Level 1: Basic Functionality
Does the feature work at all? Verify the happy path and the most obvious behavior.
- Core feature works as described
- Expected output/UI matches the spec or PR description
- No regressions in directly related functionality
Level 2: Complex Operations
Combine multiple actions in sequence. Verify state consistency across operations.
- Chain related operations (e.g., create, edit, rename, delete)
- Exercise different combinations of feature parameters
- Verify intermediate states are correct, not just the final result
Level 3: Adversarial Testing
Actively try to break the feature. Explore boundary conditions and unexpected inputs.
- Invalid, empty, or extreme inputs
- Rapid repeated actions
- Interrupting operations midway (cancel, disconnect, close)
- Resource limits (very large files, deep structures, long names)
- Permission and access edge cases
Level 4: Cross-Cutting Scenarios
Explore state interactions across system boundaries. These surface the hardest bugs.
- Concurrent modifications from different sources
- State transitions (online to offline to online, foreground to background)
- Interactions with other features that share state
- Race conditions between asynchronous operations
When a Level Does Not Apply
If the change is small enough that a level has no meaningful scenarios (e.g., a typo fix has no cross-cutting scenarios), note "N/A for this change" with a brief explanation.
Step 6: Present and Write
Output the plan as text. Then use request_user_input to ask for approval before writing.
Create .turbo/test-plans/ if it does not exist. Write the plan to .turbo/test-plans/<slug>.md using this format:
# Test Plan: <Feature/Change Name>
## Context
<Brief description of what changed and why>
## Approach
<Testing approach: agent-browser / Codex browser automation / computer-use / terminal>
<Dev server command if applicable>
## Level 1: Basic Functionality
- [ ] **<Test name>** — <Steps to perform> → Expected: <expected outcome>
## Level 2: Complex Operations
- [ ] **<Test name>** — <Steps to perform> → Expected: <expected outcome>
## Level 3: Adversarial Testing
- [ ] — → Expected:
[ ] — → Expected:
Then call update_plan to mark this step completed and continue with the next step of the active workflow.
Rules
- Generate at least 2 scenarios per level, more for complex changes.
- Each scenario must have concrete steps and an expected outcome specific to the change.
- Tailor all scenarios to the actual change. Generic test advice is not useful.
