CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

e2e-testing

End-to-end testing workflow with Playwright for browser automation, visual regression, cross-browser testing, and CI/CD integration.

49

Quality

54%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/e2e-testing/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is e2e-testing in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The skill is cleanly organized into a logical seven-phase workflow with quality gates, and it stays terse. However, it offers almost no executable guidance—no code, commands, or concrete configuration—relying on one-line @-skill invocations and generic action lists, and it lacks validation/feedback checkpoints and any bundle files to progressively disclose detail.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable examples for the highest-value phases (e.g. a minimal Playwright test snippet, a sample playwright.config browsers array, a GitHub Actions YAML snippet for Phase 7) to lift actionability.

Insert explicit validation/feedback checkpoints into the phases (e.g. 'Run `npx playwright test`; if failures occur, inspect the trace and re-run') so destructive/batch operations like CI integration and cross-browser runs are verified before proceeding.

Move the repeated 'Skills to Invoke'/'Copy-Paste Prompts' scaffolding into a shared reference file (e.g. references/phases.md) and have SKILL.md point to it, improving progressive disclosure and reducing repetition.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and section-driven with no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; the only mild inefficiency is repetitive 'Skills to Invoke'/'Copy-Paste Prompts' scaffolding repeated verbatim across seven phases.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is almost entirely high-level lists ('Install Playwright', 'Configure test framework', 'Add assertions') with no executable code, concrete commands, or copy-paste-ready snippets beyond one-line @-skill invocations, leaving the actual steps unspecified.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The seven phases provide a clear sequence and the Quality Gates act as a loose checkpoint list, but the phases lack explicit validation steps and feedback loops for operations (e.g. CI integration, cross-browser runs) that warrant verify-and-retry checkpoints.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned by phase, but it inlines repetitive per-phase scaffolding that could live in a shared reference and references only peer skill names rather than any bundle files; no references/ scripts/ or assets/ directory exists to offload detail.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

58%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description names a clear Playwright-specific niche with several concrete capability areas, but it omits any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance and leans on technical terms without the natural phrasings a user might say. Adding an explicit when-to-use clause and synonyms would lift completeness and trigger quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when setting up end-to-end tests, automating browser checks, or integrating E2E tests into CI/CD pipelines.'

Include natural synonyms a user might say such as 'end-to-end tests', 'integration tests', 'screenshot/visual tests', and 'flaky test debugging' to improve trigger matching.

Optionally name the concrete outputs (test scripts, baseline images, CI workflow files) to round out capability coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names four concrete action areas (browser automation, visual regression, cross-browser testing, CI/CD integration) which is several specific actions with only minor coverage gaps (e.g. no mention of test authoring/reporting).

4 / 5

Completeness

The description clearly states what the workflow does but lacks any 'Use when...' clause or explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant terms ('Playwright', 'E2E testing', 'browser automation', 'visual regression', 'cross-browser', 'CI/CD') but is missing common synonyms users would naturally say (e.g. 'end-to-end', 'integration tests', 'screenshot testing', 'flaky tests').

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Playwright-specific framing carves a clear niche distinct from generic testing skills, with only minor overlap risk against other browser/E2E testing skills.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.