312 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
312 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
last-redoc-date: 2025-10-14
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Test Architect (TEA) Agent Guide
|
||
|
||
## Overview
|
||
|
||
- **Persona:** Murat, Master Test Architect and Quality Advisor focused on risk-based testing, fixture architecture, ATDD, and CI/CD governance.
|
||
- **Mission:** Deliver actionable quality strategies, automation coverage, and gate decisions that scale with project level and compliance demands.
|
||
- **Use When:** Project level ≥2, integration risk is non-trivial, brownfield regression risk exists, or compliance/NFR evidence is required.
|
||
|
||
## TEA Workflow Lifecycle
|
||
|
||
TEA integrates across the entire BMad development lifecycle, providing quality assurance at every phase:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ BMM Phase 2: PLANNING │
|
||
│ │
|
||
│ PM: *prd │
|
||
│ ↓ │
|
||
│ TEA: *framework ──→ *ci ──→ *test-design │
|
||
│ └─────────┬─────────────┘ │
|
||
│ │ (Setup once per project) │
|
||
└─────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ BMM Phase 4: IMPLEMENTATION │
|
||
│ (Per Story Cycle) │
|
||
│ │
|
||
│ ┌─→ SM: *create-story │
|
||
│ │ ↓ │
|
||
│ │ TEA: *atdd (optional, before dev) │
|
||
│ │ ↓ │
|
||
│ │ DEV: implements story │
|
||
│ │ ↓ │
|
||
│ │ TEA: *automate ──→ *test-review (optional) │
|
||
│ │ ↓ │
|
||
│ │ TEA: *trace (refresh coverage) │
|
||
│ │ ↓ │
|
||
│ └───[next story] │
|
||
└─────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||
↓
|
||
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||
│ EPIC/RELEASE GATE │
|
||
│ │
|
||
│ TEA: *nfr-assess (if not done earlier) │
|
||
│ ↓ │
|
||
│ TEA: *test-review (final audit, optional) │
|
||
│ ↓ │
|
||
│ TEA: *trace (Phase 2: Gate) ──→ PASS | CONCERNS | FAIL | WAIVED │
|
||
│ │
|
||
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### TEA Integration with BMad v6 Workflow
|
||
|
||
TEA operates **across all four BMad phases**, unlike other agents that are phase-specific:
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary><strong>Cross-Phase Integration & Workflow Complexity</strong></summary>
|
||
|
||
### Phase-Specific Agents (Standard Pattern)
|
||
|
||
- **Phase 1 (Analysis)**: Analyst agent
|
||
- **Phase 2 (Planning)**: PM agent
|
||
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect agent
|
||
- **Phase 4 (Implementation)**: SM, DEV agents
|
||
|
||
### TEA: Cross-Phase Quality Agent (Unique Pattern)
|
||
|
||
TEA is **the only agent that spans all phases**:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
Phase 1 (Analysis) → [TEA not typically used]
|
||
↓
|
||
Phase 2 (Planning) → TEA: *framework, *ci, *test-design (setup)
|
||
↓
|
||
Phase 3 (Solutioning) → [TEA validates architecture testability]
|
||
↓
|
||
Phase 4 (Implementation) → TEA: *atdd, *automate, *test-review, *trace (per story)
|
||
↓
|
||
Epic/Release Gate → TEA: *nfr-assess, *trace Phase 2 (release decision)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Why TEA Needs 8 Workflows
|
||
|
||
**Standard agents**: 1-3 workflows per phase
|
||
**TEA**: 8 workflows across 3+ phases
|
||
|
||
| Phase | TEA Workflows | Frequency | Purpose |
|
||
| ----------- | -------------------------------------- | ---------------- | -------------------------------- |
|
||
| **Phase 2** | *framework, *ci, \*test-design | Once per project | Establish quality infrastructure |
|
||
| **Phase 4** | *atdd, *automate, *test-review, *trace | Per story/sprint | Continuous quality validation |
|
||
| **Release** | *nfr-assess, *trace (Phase 2: gate) | Per epic/release | Go/no-go decision |
|
||
|
||
**Note**: `*trace` is a two-phase workflow: Phase 1 (traceability) + Phase 2 (gate decision). This reduces cognitive load while maintaining natural workflow.
|
||
|
||
This complexity **requires specialized documentation** (this guide), **extensive knowledge base** (19+ fragments), and **unique architecture** (`testarch/` directory).
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
## Prerequisites and Setup
|
||
|
||
1. Run the core planning workflows first:
|
||
- Analyst `*product-brief`
|
||
- Product Manager `*prd`
|
||
- Architect `*create-architecture`
|
||
2. Confirm `bmad/bmm/config.yaml` defines `project_name`, `output_folder`, `dev_story_location`, and language settings.
|
||
3. Ensure a test test framework setup exists; if not, use `*framework` command to create a test framework setup, prior to development.
|
||
4. Skim supporting references (knowledge under `testarch/`, command workflows under `workflows/testarch/`).
|
||
- `tea-index.csv` + `knowledge/*.md`
|
||
|
||
## High-Level Cheat Sheets
|
||
|
||
### Greenfield Feature Launch (Level 2)
|
||
|
||
| Phase | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||
| Setup | - | Analyst `*product-brief`, PM `*prd`, Architect `*create-architecture` | `{output_folder}/product-brief*.md`, `PRD.md`, `epics.md`, `architecture.md` |
|
||
| Pre-Implementation | Run `*framework` (if harness missing), `*ci`, and `*test-design` | Review risk/design/CI guidance, align backlog | Test scaffold, CI pipeline, risk and coverage strategy |
|
||
| Story Prep | - | Scrum Master `*create-story`, `*story-context` | Story markdown + context XML |
|
||
| Implementation | (Optional) Trigger `*atdd` before dev to supply failing tests + checklist | Implement story guided by ATDD checklist | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist |
|
||
| Post-Dev | Execute `*automate`, (Optional) `*test-review`, re-run `*trace` | Address recommendations, update code/tests | Regression specs, quality report, refreshed coverage matrix |
|
||
| Release | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Confirm Definition of Done, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary (owners, waivers) |
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||
|
||
- Run `*framework` only once per repo or when modern harness support is missing.
|
||
- `*framework` followed by `*ci` establishes install + pipeline; `*test-design` then handles risk scoring, mitigations, and scenario planning in one pass.
|
||
- 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.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Worked Example – “Nova CRM” Greenfield Feature</summary>
|
||
|
||
1. **Planning:** Analyst runs `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to produce PRD and epics; Architect completes `*create-architecture` for the new module.
|
||
2. **Setup:** TEA checks harness via `*framework`, configures `*ci`, and runs `*test-design` to capture risk/coverage plans.
|
||
3. **Story Prep:** Scrum Master generates the story via `*create-story`; PO validates using `*solutioning-gate-check`.
|
||
4. **Implementation:** TEA optionally runs `*atdd`; Dev implements with guidance from failing tests and the plan.
|
||
5. **Post-Dev and Release:** TEA runs `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate both traceability and gate decision.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
### Brownfield Feature Enhancement (Level 3–4)
|
||
|
||
| Phase | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||
| ----------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||
| Refresh Context | - | Analyst/PM/Architect rerun planning workflows | Updated planning artifacts in `{output_folder}` |
|
||
| Baseline Coverage | Run `*trace` to inventory existing tests | Review matrix, flag hotspots | Coverage matrix + initial gate snippet |
|
||
| Risk Targeting | Run `*test-design` | Align remediation/backlog priorities | Brownfield risk memo + scenario matrix |
|
||
| Story Prep | - | Scrum Master `*create-story` | Updated story markdown |
|
||
| Implementation | (Optional) Run `*atdd` before dev | Implement story, referencing checklist/tests | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist |
|
||
| Post-Dev | Apply `*automate`, (Optional) `*test-review`, re-run `*trace`, `*nfr-assess` if needed | Resolve gaps, update docs/tests | Regression specs, quality report, refreshed coverage matrix, NFR report |
|
||
| Release | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Product Owner `*solutioning-gate-check`, share release notes | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary |
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||
|
||
- Lead with `*trace` so remediation plans target true coverage gaps. Ensure `*framework` and `*ci` are in place early in the engagement; if the brownfield lacks them, run those setup steps immediately after refreshing context.
|
||
- `*test-design` should highlight regression hotspots, mitigations, and P0 scenarios.
|
||
- 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.
|
||
- Product Owner `*solutioning-gate-check` confirms the team has artifacts before handoff or release.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Worked Example – “Atlas Payments” Brownfield Story</summary>
|
||
|
||
1. **Context Refresh:** Analyst reruns `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to update PRD, analysis, and `epics.md`; Architect triggers `*create-architecture` capturing legacy payment flows.
|
||
2. **Baseline Coverage:** TEA executes `*trace` to record current coverage in `docs/qa/assessments/atlas-payment-trace.md`.
|
||
3. **Risk and Design:** `*test-design` flags settlement edge cases, plans mitigations, and allocates new API/E2E scenarios with P0 priorities.
|
||
4. **Story Prep:** Scrum Master generates `stories/story-1.1.md` via `*create-story`, automatically pulling updated context.
|
||
5. **ATDD First:** TEA runs `*atdd`, producing failing Playwright specs under `tests/e2e/payments/` plus an implementation checklist.
|
||
6. **Implementation:** Dev pairs with the checklist/tests to deliver the story.
|
||
7. **Post-Implementation:** TEA applies `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled, performs `*nfr-assess` to validate SLAs. The `*trace` Phase 2 output marks PASS with follow-ups.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
### Enterprise / Compliance Program (Level 4)
|
||
|
||
| Phase | Test Architect | Dev / Team | Outputs |
|
||
| ------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||
| Strategic Planning | - | Analyst/PM/Architect standard workflows | Enterprise-grade PRD, epics, architecture |
|
||
| Quality Planning | Run `*framework`, `*test-design`, `*nfr-assess` | Review guidance, align compliance requirements | Harness scaffold, risk + coverage plan, NFR documentation |
|
||
| Pipeline Enablement | Configure `*ci` | Coordinate secrets, pipeline approvals | `.github/workflows/test.yml`, helper scripts |
|
||
| Execution | Enforce `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, `*trace` per story | Implement stories, resolve TEA findings | Tests, fixtures, quality reports, coverage matrices |
|
||
| Release | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Capture sign-offs, archive artifacts | Quality audit, updated assessments, gate YAML, audit trail |
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>
|
||
|
||
- Use `*atdd` for every story when feasible so acceptance tests lead implementation in regulated environments.
|
||
- `*ci` scaffolds selective testing scripts, burn-in jobs, caching, and notifications for long-running suites.
|
||
- Enforce `*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); store everything for audits. Call `*nfr-assess` here if compliance/performance requirements weren't captured during planning.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary>Worked Example – “Helios Ledger” Enterprise Release</summary>
|
||
|
||
1. **Strategic Planning:** Analyst/PM/Architect complete PRD, epics, and architecture using the standard workflows.
|
||
2. **Quality Planning:** TEA runs `*framework`, `*test-design`, and `*nfr-assess` to establish mitigations, coverage, and NFR targets.
|
||
3. **Pipeline Setup:** TEA configures CI via `*ci` with selective execution scripts.
|
||
4. **Execution:** For each story, TEA enforces `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, and `*trace`; Dev teams iterate on the findings.
|
||
5. **Release:** 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>
|
||
|
||
## Command Catalog
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary><strong>Optional Playwright MCP Enhancements</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`)
|
||
|
||
**How MCP Enhances TEA Workflows**:
|
||
|
||
MCP provides additional capabilities on top of TEA's default AI-based approach:
|
||
|
||
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`:
|
||
- 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
|
||
|
||
**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>
|
||
|
||
<br></br>
|
||
|
||
| Command | Workflow README | Primary Outputs | Notes | With Playwright MCP Enhancements |
|
||
| -------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
||
| `*framework` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/framework/README.md) | Playwright/Cypress scaffold, `.env.example`, `.nvmrc`, sample specs | Use when no production-ready harness exists | - |
|
||
| `*ci` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/ci/README.md) | CI workflow, selective test scripts, secrets checklist | Platform-aware (GitHub Actions default) | - |
|
||
| `*test-design` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/test-design/README.md) | Combined risk assessment, mitigation plan, and coverage strategy | Risk scoring + optional exploratory mode | **+ Exploratory**: Interactive UI discovery with browser automation (uncover actual functionality) |
|
||
| `*atdd` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/atdd/README.md) | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist | TDD red phase + optional recording mode | **+ Recording**: AI generation verified with live browser (accurate selectors from real DOM) |
|
||
| `*automate` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/automate/README.md) | 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` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/test-review/README.md) | Test quality review report with 0-100 score, violations, fixes | Reviews tests against knowledge base patterns | - |
|
||
| `*nfr-assess` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/nfr-assess/README.md) | NFR assessment report with actions | Focus on security/performance/reliability | - |
|
||
| `*trace` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/trace/README.md) | Phase 1: Coverage matrix, recommendations. Phase 2: Gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED) | Two-phase workflow: traceability + gate decision | - |
|
||
|
||
**📖** = Click to view detailed workflow documentation
|
||
|
||
## Why TEA is Architecturally Different
|
||
|
||
TEA is the only BMM agent with its own top-level module directory (`bmm/testarch/`). This intentional design pattern reflects TEA's unique requirements:
|
||
|
||
<details>
|
||
<summary><strong>Unique Architecture Pattern & Rationale</strong></summary>
|
||
|
||
### Directory Structure
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
src/modules/bmm/
|
||
├── agents/
|
||
│ └── tea.agent.yaml # Agent definition (standard location)
|
||
├── workflows/
|
||
│ └── testarch/ # TEA workflows (standard location)
|
||
└── testarch/ # Knowledge base (UNIQUE!)
|
||
├── knowledge/ # 21 production-ready test pattern fragments
|
||
├── tea-index.csv # Centralized knowledge lookup (21 fragments indexed)
|
||
└── README.md # This guide
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Why TEA Gets Special Treatment
|
||
|
||
TEA uniquely requires **extensive domain knowledge** (21 fragments, 12,821 lines: test patterns, CI/CD, fixtures, quality practices, healing strategies), a **centralized reference system** (`tea-index.csv` for on-demand fragment loading), **cross-cutting concerns** (domain-specific patterns vs project-specific artifacts like PRDs/stories), and **optional MCP integration** (healing, exploratory, verification modes). Other BMM agents don't require this architecture.
|
||
|
||
</details>
|