docs: expand TEA documentation with cheat sheets, MCP enhancements, a… (#1289)

* docs: expand TEA documentation with cheat sheets, MCP enhancements, and API testing patterns

* docs: update TEA fragment counts and fix playwright-utils code examples

* docs: addressed PR review concerns

* docs: update TEA MCP configuration link to point to documentation site
This commit is contained in:
Murat K Ozcan
2026-01-09 12:55:57 -06:00
committed by GitHub
parent 12d3492e0c
commit 3e3c92ed3e
14 changed files with 2833 additions and 366 deletions

View File

@@ -195,20 +195,295 @@ Epic/Release Gate → TEA: *nfr-assess, *trace Phase 2 (release decision)
**Note**: `*trace` is a two-phase workflow: Phase 1 (traceability) + Phase 2 (gate decision). This reduces cognitive load while maintaining natural workflow.
### Why TEA Requires Its Own Knowledge Base
TEA uniquely requires:
- **Extensive domain knowledge**: 30+ fragments covering test patterns, CI/CD, fixtures, quality practices, and optional playwright-utils integration
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Domain-specific testing patterns that apply across all BMad projects (vs project-specific artifacts like PRDs/stories)
- **Optional integrations**: MCP capabilities (exploratory, verification) and playwright-utils support
This architecture enables TEA to maintain consistent, production-ready testing patterns across all BMad projects while operating across multiple development phases.
---
## High-Level Cheat Sheets
These cheat sheets map TEA workflows to the **BMad Method and Enterprise tracks** across the **4-Phase Methodology** (Phase 1: Analysis, Phase 2: Planning, Phase 3: Solutioning, Phase 4: Implementation).
**Note:** Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA (covered in Overview). These cheat sheets focus on BMad Method and Enterprise tracks where TEA adds value.
**Legend for Track Deltas:**
- = New workflow or phase added (doesn't exist in baseline)
- 🔄 = Modified focus (same workflow, different emphasis or purpose)
- 📦 = Additional output or archival requirement
### Greenfield - BMad Method (Simple/Standard Work)
**Planning Track:** BMad Method (PRD + Architecture)
**Use Case:** New projects with standard complexity
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
| -------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst `*product-brief` (optional) | `product-brief.md` |
| **Phase 2**: Planning | - | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs) | PRD with functional/non-functional requirements |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test scaffold, CI pipeline |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic (per-epic test plan) | Review epic scope | `test-design-epic-N.md` with risk assessment and test plan |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, story implementation |
| **Phase 4**: Story Review | Execute `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace` | Address recommendations, update code/tests | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Confirm Definition of Done, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary |
<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
- Run `*framework` only once per repo or when modern harness support is missing.
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` to setup test infrastructure based on architectural decisions.
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to create a test plan for THAT specific epic/feature. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` before coding when the team can adopt ATDD; share its checklist with the dev agent.
- Post-implementation, keep `*trace` current, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`. For release gate, run `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to get deployment decision.
- Use `*test-review` after `*atdd` to validate generated tests, after `*automate` to ensure regression quality, or before gate for final audit.
- Clarification: `*test-review` is optional and only audits existing tests; run it after `*atdd` or `*automate` when you want a quality review, not as a required step.
- Clarification: `*atdd` outputs are not auto-consumed; share the ATDD doc/tests with the dev workflow. `*trace` does not run `*atdd`—it evaluates existing artifacts for coverage and gate readiness.
- Clarification: `*ci` is a one-time setup; recommended early (Phase 3 or before feature work), but it can be done later if it was skipped.
</details>
<details>
<summary>Worked Example “Nova CRM” Greenfield Feature</summary>
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to produce PRD with FRs/NFRs.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` for the new module; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates epics/stories based on architecture; TEA sets up test infrastructure via `*framework` and `*ci` based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning completeness.
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
4. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` to create test plan for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` with risk assessment.
5. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA optionally runs `*atdd`; Dev implements with guidance from failing tests.
6. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
7. **Release Gate:** TEA runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision.
</details>
### Brownfield - BMad Method or Enterprise (Simple or Complex)
**Planning Tracks:** BMad Method or Enterprise Method
**Use Case:** Existing codebases - simple additions (BMad Method) or complex enterprise requirements (Enterprise Method)
**🔄 Brownfield Deltas from Greenfield:**
- Documentation (Prerequisite) - Document existing codebase if undocumented
- Phase 2: `*trace` - Baseline existing test coverage before planning
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` - Focus on regression hotspots and brownfield risks
- 🔄 Phase 4: Story Review - May include `*nfr-assess` if not done earlier
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
| --------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Documentation**: Prerequisite | - | Analyst `*document-project` (if undocumented) | Comprehensive project documentation |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst/PM/Architect rerun planning workflows | Updated planning artifacts in `{output_folder}` |
| **Phase 2**: Planning | Run `*trace` (baseline coverage) | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs) | PRD with FRs/NFRs, coverage baseline |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test framework, CI pipeline |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic 🔄 (regression hotspots) | Review epic scope and brownfield risks | `test-design-epic-N.md` with brownfield risk assessment and mitigation |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, story implementation |
| **Phase 4**: Story Review | Apply `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace`, `*nfr-assess` if needed | Resolve gaps, update docs/tests | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix, NFR report |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Capture sign-offs, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary |
<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
- Lead with `*trace` during Planning (Phase 2) to baseline existing test coverage before architecture work begins.
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` to modernize test infrastructure. For brownfield, framework may need to integrate with or replace existing test setup.
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete and sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to identify regression hotspots, integration risks, and mitigation strategies for THAT specific epic/feature. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` when stories benefit from ATDD; otherwise proceed to implementation and rely on post-dev automation.
- After development, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`, re-run `*trace` (Phase 2 for gate decision). Run `*nfr-assess` now if non-functional risks weren't addressed earlier.
- Use `*test-review` to validate existing brownfield tests or audit new tests before gate.
</details>
<details>
<summary>Worked Example “Atlas Payments” Brownfield Story</summary>
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** PM executes `*prd` to create PRD with FRs/NFRs; TEA runs `*trace` to baseline existing coverage.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect triggers `*architecture` capturing legacy payment flows and integration architecture; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates Epic 1 (Payment Processing) based on architecture; TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning.
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load Epic 1 into sprint status.
4. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` for Epic 1 (Payment Processing), producing `test-design-epic-1.md` that flags settlement edge cases, regression hotspots, and mitigation plans.
5. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA runs `*atdd` producing failing Playwright specs; Dev implements with guidance from tests and checklist.
6. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA applies `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
7. **Release Gate:** TEA performs `*nfr-assess` to validate SLAs, runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL).
</details>
### Greenfield - Enterprise Method (Enterprise/Compliance Work)
**Planning Track:** Enterprise Method (BMad Method + extended security/devops/test strategies)
**Use Case:** New enterprise projects with compliance, security, or complex regulatory requirements
**🏢 Enterprise Deltas from BMad Method:**
- Phase 1: `*research` - Domain and compliance research (recommended)
- Phase 2: `*nfr-assess` - Capture NFR requirements early (security/performance/reliability)
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` - Enterprise focus (compliance, security architecture alignment)
- 📦 Release Gate - Archive artifacts and compliance evidence for audits
| Workflow Stage | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
| -------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery | - | Analyst `*research`, `*product-brief` | Domain research, compliance analysis, product brief |
| **Phase 2**: Planning | Run `*nfr-assess` | PM `*prd` (creates PRD with FRs/NFRs), UX `*create-ux-design` | Enterprise PRD with FRs/NFRs, UX design, NFR documentation |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*framework`, `*ci` AFTER architecture and epic creation | Architect `*architecture`, `*create-epics-and-stories`, `*implementation-readiness` | Architecture, epics/stories, test framework, CI pipeline |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Start | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint plan with all epics |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` for THIS epic 🔄 (compliance focus) | Review epic scope and compliance requirements | `test-design-epic-N.md` with security/performance/compliance focus |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev | (Optional) `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, `*trace` per story | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements | Tests, fixtures, quality reports, coverage matrices |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate | Final `*test-review` audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2), 📦 archive artifacts | Capture sign-offs, 📦 compliance evidence | Quality audit, updated assessments, gate YAML, 📦 audit trail |
<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
- `*nfr-assess` runs early in Planning (Phase 2) to capture compliance, security, and performance requirements upfront.
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: After architecture is complete, run `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations (selective testing, burn-in jobs, caching, notifications).
- **Phase 4 starts**: After solutioning is complete and sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic**: At the beginning of working on each epic, run `*test-design` to create an enterprise-focused test plan for THAT specific epic, ensuring alignment with security architecture, performance targets, and compliance requirements. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` for stories when feasible so acceptance tests can lead implementation.
- Use `*test-review` per story or sprint to maintain quality standards and ensure compliance with testing best practices.
- Prior to release, rerun coverage (`*trace`, `*automate`), perform final quality audit with `*test-review`, and formalize the decision with `*trace` Phase 2 (gate decision); archive artifacts for compliance audits.
</details>
<details>
<summary>Worked Example “Helios Ledger” Enterprise Release</summary>
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*research` and `*product-brief`; PM completes `*prd` creating PRD with FRs/NFRs; TEA runs `*nfr-assess` to establish NFR targets.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` with enterprise considerations; `*create-epics-and-stories` generates epics/stories based on architecture; TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations based on architectural decisions; gate check validates planning completeness.
3. **Sprint Start (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
4. **Per-Epic (Phase 4):** For each epic, TEA runs `*test-design` to create epic-specific test plan (e.g., `test-design-epic-1.md`, `test-design-epic-2.md`) with compliance-focused risk assessment.
5. **Per-Story (Phase 4):** For each story, TEA uses `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, and `*trace`; Dev teams iterate on the findings.
6. **Release Gate:** TEA re-checks coverage, performs final quality audit with `*test-review`, and logs the final gate decision via `*trace` Phase 2, archiving artifacts for compliance.
</details>
---
## TEA Command Catalog
| Command | Primary Outputs | Notes |
| -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- |
| `*framework` | Playwright/Cypress scaffold, `.env.example`, `.nvmrc`, sample specs | Use when no production-ready harness exists |
| `*ci` | CI workflow, selective test scripts, secrets checklist | Platform-aware (GitHub Actions default) |
| `*test-design` | Combined risk assessment, mitigation plan, and coverage strategy | Risk scoring + optional exploratory mode |
| `*atdd` | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist | TDD red phase + optional recording mode |
| `*automate` | Prioritized specs, fixtures, README/script updates, DoD summary | Optional healing/recording, avoid duplicate coverage |
| `*test-review` | Test quality review report with 0-100 score, violations, fixes | Reviews tests against knowledge base patterns |
| `*nfr-assess` | NFR assessment report with actions | Focus on security/performance/reliability |
| `*trace` | Phase 1: Coverage matrix, recommendations. Phase 2: Gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED) | Two-phase workflow: traceability + gate decision |
| Command | Primary Outputs | Notes | With Playwright MCP Enhancements |
| -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `*framework` | Playwright/Cypress scaffold, `.env.example`, `.nvmrc`, sample specs | Use when no production-ready harness exists | - |
| `*ci` | CI workflow, selective test scripts, secrets checklist | Platform-aware (GitHub Actions default) | - |
| `*test-design` | Combined risk assessment, mitigation plan, and coverage strategy | Risk scoring + optional exploratory mode | **+ Exploratory**: Interactive UI discovery with browser automation (uncover actual functionality) |
| `*atdd` | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist | TDD red phase + optional recording mode | **+ Recording**: AI generation verified with live browser (accurate selectors from real DOM) |
| `*automate` | Prioritized specs, fixtures, README/script updates, DoD summary | Optional healing/recording, avoid duplicate coverage | **+ Healing**: Pattern fixes enhanced with visual debugging + **+ Recording**: AI verified with live browser |
| `*test-review` | Test quality review report with 0-100 score, violations, fixes | Reviews tests against knowledge base patterns | - |
| `*nfr-assess` | NFR assessment report with actions | Focus on security/performance/reliability | - |
| `*trace` | Phase 1: Coverage matrix, recommendations. Phase 2: Gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED) | Two-phase workflow: traceability + gate decision | - |
---
## Playwright Utils Integration
TEA optionally integrates with `@seontechnologies/playwright-utils`, an open-source library providing fixture-based utilities for Playwright tests. This integration enhances TEA's test generation and review workflows with production-ready patterns.
<details>
<summary><strong>Installation & Configuration</strong></summary>
**Package**: `@seontechnologies/playwright-utils` ([npm](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@seontechnologies/playwright-utils) | [GitHub](https://github.com/seontechnologies/playwright-utils))
**Install**: `npm install -D @seontechnologies/playwright-utils`
**Enable during BMAD installation** by answering "Yes" when prompted, or manually set `tea_use_playwright_utils: true` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml`.
**To disable**: Set `tea_use_playwright_utils: false` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml`.
</details>
<details>
<summary><strong>How Playwright Utils Enhances TEA Workflows</strong></summary>
1. `*framework`:
- Default: Basic Playwright scaffold
- **+ playwright-utils**: Scaffold with api-request, network-recorder, auth-session, burn-in, network-error-monitor fixtures pre-configured
Benefit: Production-ready patterns from day one
2. `*automate`, `*atdd`:
- Default: Standard test patterns
- **+ playwright-utils**: Tests using api-request (schema validation), intercept-network-call (mocking), recurse (polling), log (structured logging), file-utils (CSV/PDF)
Benefit: Advanced patterns without boilerplate
3. `*test-review`:
- Default: Reviews against core knowledge base (22 fragments)
- **+ playwright-utils**: Reviews against expanded knowledge base (33 fragments: 22 core + 11 playwright-utils)
Benefit: Reviews include fixture composition, auth patterns, network recording best practices
4. `*ci`:
- Default: Standard CI workflow
- **+ playwright-utils**: CI workflow with burn-in script (smart test selection) and network-error-monitor integration
Benefit: Faster CI feedback, HTTP error detection
**Utilities available** (10 total): api-request, network-recorder, auth-session, intercept-network-call, recurse, log, file-utils, burn-in, network-error-monitor, fixtures-composition
</details>
---
## Playwright MCP Enhancements
TEA can leverage Playwright MCP servers to enhance test generation with live browser verification. MCP provides interactive capabilities on top of TEA's default AI-based approach.
<details>
<summary><strong>MCP Server Configuration</strong></summary>
**Two Playwright MCP servers** (actively maintained, continuously updated):
- `playwright` - Browser automation (`npx @playwright/mcp@latest`)
- `playwright-test` - Test runner with failure analysis (`npx playwright run-test-mcp-server`)
**Config example**:
```json
{
"mcpServers": {
"playwright": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@playwright/mcp@latest"]
},
"playwright-test": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["playwright", "run-test-mcp-server"]
}
}
}
```
**To disable**: Set `tea_use_mcp_enhancements: false` in `_bmad/bmm/config.yaml` OR remove MCPs from IDE config.
</details>
<details>
<summary><strong>How MCP Enhances TEA Workflows</strong></summary>
1. `*test-design`:
- Default: Analysis + documentation
- **+ MCP**: Interactive UI discovery with `browser_navigate`, `browser_click`, `browser_snapshot`, behavior observation
Benefit: Discover actual functionality, edge cases, undocumented features
2. `*atdd`, `*automate`:
- Default: Infers selectors and interactions from requirements and knowledge fragments
- **+ MCP**: Generates tests **then** verifies with `generator_setup_page`, `browser_*` tools, validates against live app
Benefit: Accurate selectors from real DOM, verified behavior, refined test code
3. `*automate` (healing mode):
- Default: Pattern-based fixes from error messages + knowledge fragments
- **+ MCP**: Pattern fixes **enhanced with** `browser_snapshot`, `browser_console_messages`, `browser_network_requests`, `browser_generate_locator`
Benefit: Visual failure context, live DOM inspection, root cause discovery
</details>
---