BMAD-METHOD/.bmad/bmm/docs/test-architecture.md

434 lines
33 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
last-redoc-date: 2025-11-05
---
# 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 complexity and compliance demands.
- **Use When:** BMad Method or Enterprise track projects, integration risk is non-trivial, brownfield regression risk exists, or compliance/NFR evidence is required. (Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA)
## TEA Workflow Lifecycle
TEA integrates into the BMad development lifecycle during Implementation (Phase 4):
```mermaid
%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','secondaryColor':'#fff','tertiaryColor':'#fff','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
graph TB
subgraph Phase2["<b>Phase 2: PLANNING</b>"]
PM["<b>PM: *prd (creates PRD + epics)</b>"]
PlanNote["<b>Business requirements phase</b>"]
PM -.-> PlanNote
end
subgraph Phase3["<b>Phase 3: SOLUTIONING</b>"]
Architecture["<b>Architect: *architecture</b>"]
TestDesignSys["<b>TEA: *test-design (system-level)</b>"]
ValidateArch["<b>Architect: *validate-architecture</b>"]
GateCheck["<b>Architect: *solutioning-gate-check</b>"]
Architecture --> TestDesignSys
TestDesignSys --> ValidateArch
ValidateArch --> GateCheck
Phase3Note["<b>Testability review before gate</b><br/>Recommended: Method | Required: Enterprise"]
TestDesignSys -.-> Phase3Note
end
subgraph Phase4["<b>Phase 4: IMPLEMENTATION</b>"]
subgraph Sprint0["<b>Sprint 0: Infrastructure Setup</b>"]
Framework["<b>TEA: *framework</b>"]
CI["<b>TEA: *ci</b>"]
Framework --> CI
Sprint0Note["<b>Test infrastructure setup</b><br/>based on architectural decisions"]
Framework -.-> Sprint0Note
end
SprintPlan["<b>SM: *sprint-planning</b>"]
subgraph PerEpic["<b>Per Epic Cycle</b>"]
TestDesign["<b>TEA: *test-design (per epic)</b>"]
CreateStory["<b>SM: *create-story</b>"]
ATDD["<b>TEA: *atdd (optional, before dev)</b>"]
DevImpl["<b>DEV: implements story</b>"]
Automate["<b>TEA: *automate</b>"]
TestReview1["<b>TEA: *test-review (optional)</b>"]
Trace1["<b>TEA: *trace (refresh coverage)</b>"]
TestDesign --> CreateStory
CreateStory --> ATDD
ATDD --> DevImpl
DevImpl --> Automate
Automate --> TestReview1
TestReview1 --> Trace1
Trace1 -.->|next story| CreateStory
TestDesignNote["<b>Test design: 'How do I test THIS epic?'</b><br/>Creates test-design-epic-N.md per epic"]
TestDesign -.-> TestDesignNote
end
CI --> SprintPlan
SprintPlan --> TestDesign
end
subgraph Gate["<b>EPIC/RELEASE GATE</b>"]
NFR["<b>TEA: *nfr-assess (if not done earlier)</b>"]
TestReview2["<b>TEA: *test-review (final audit, optional)</b>"]
TraceGate["<b>TEA: *trace - Phase 2: Gate</b>"]
GateDecision{"<b>Gate Decision</b>"}
NFR --> TestReview2
TestReview2 --> TraceGate
TraceGate --> GateDecision
GateDecision -->|PASS| Pass["<b>PASS ✅</b>"]
GateDecision -->|CONCERNS| Concerns["<b>CONCERNS ⚠️</b>"]
GateDecision -->|FAIL| Fail["<b>FAIL ❌</b>"]
GateDecision -->|WAIVED| Waived["<b>WAIVED ⏭️</b>"]
end
Phase2 --> Phase3
Phase3 --> Phase4
Phase4 --> Gate
style Phase2 fill:#bbdefb,stroke:#0d47a1,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Phase3 fill:#c8e6c9,stroke:#2e7d32,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Phase4 fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Sprint0 fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
style PerEpic fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
style Gate fill:#ffe082,stroke:#f57c00,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Pass fill:#4caf50,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Concerns fill:#ffc107,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Fail fill:#f44336,stroke:#b71c1c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
style Waived fill:#9c27b0,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
```
**Phase Numbering Note:** BMad uses a 4-phase methodology with optional Phase 0/1:
- **Phase 0** (Optional): Documentation (brownfield prerequisite - `*document-project`)
- **Phase 1** (Optional): Discovery/Analysis (`*brainstorm`, `*research`, `*product-brief`)
- **Phase 2** (Required): Planning (`*prd` creates PRD + epics)
- **Phase 3** (Required): Solutioning (`*architecture` → `*validate-architecture``*solutioning-gate-check`)
- **Phase 4** (Required): Implementation
- **Sprint 0**: Test infrastructure setup (`*framework`, `*ci`) based on architectural decisions
- **Sprint Planning**: Load epics into sprint status
- **Per-Epic**: `*test-design` → per-story dev workflows
**TEA workflows:** `*test-design` runs in Phase 3 (system-level testability review, recommended/required) and Phase 4 (per-epic planning). `*framework` and `*ci` run once in Phase 4 Sprint 0 (after architecture and testability are approved).
Quick Flow track skips Phases 0, 1, and 3. BMad Method and Enterprise use all phases based on project needs.
### Why TEA is Different from Other BMM Agents
TEA is the only BMM agent that operates in **both Phase 3 (Solutioning) and Phase 4 (Implementation)** and has its own **knowledge base architecture**.
<details>
<summary><strong>Cross-Phase Operation & Unique Architecture</strong></summary>
### Phase-Specific Agents (Standard Pattern)
Most BMM agents work in a single phase:
- **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 operates in both Phase 3 (Solutioning) and Phase 4 (Implementation)**:
```
Phase 1 (Analysis) → [TEA not typically used]
Phase 2 (Planning) → [PM defines requirements - TEA not active]
Phase 3 (Solutioning) → TEA: *test-design (system-level testability review before gate)
Phase 4 Sprint 0 → TEA: *framework, *ci (test infrastructure setup based on testability review)
Phase 4 Sprint Planning → [SM loads epics into sprint status]
Phase 4 Per-Epic → TEA: *test-design (per epic: "how do I test THIS feature?")
Phase 4 Per-Story → TEA: *atdd, *automate, *test-review, *trace (per story)
Epic/Release Gate → TEA: *nfr-assess, *trace Phase 2 (release decision)
```
### TEA's 8 Workflows Across Phase 3-4
**Standard agents**: 1-3 workflows per phase
**TEA**: 8 workflows spanning Phase 3 Solutioning through Phase 4 Release Gate
| Phase | TEA Workflows | Frequency | Purpose |
| --------------------- | ---------------------------------------- | ---------------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 2** | (none) | - | Planning phase - PM defines requirements |
| **Phase 3** | \*test-design (system-level) | Once per project | Testability review before solutioning gate |
| **Phase 4 Sprint 0** | *framework, *ci | Once per project | Setup test infrastructure based on testability |
| **Phase 4 Per-Epic** | \*test-design (epic-level) | Per epic | Test planning: "how do I test THIS epic?" |
| **Phase 4 Per-Story** | *atdd, *automate, \*test-review, \*trace | Per story | Test implementation and quality validation |
| **Release Gate** | *nfr-assess, *trace (Phase 2: gate) | Per epic/release | Go/no-go decision |
**Note**: Like `*trace`, `*test-design` is now a dual-mode workflow: system-level mode (testability review in Phase 3) and epic-level mode (test planning in Phase 4). Auto-detects mode based on project phase.
### Unique Directory Architecture
TEA is the only BMM agent with its own top-level module directory (`bmm/testarch/`):
```
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 covering test patterns, CI/CD, fixtures, quality practices, healing strategies
- **Centralized reference system**: `tea-index.csv` for on-demand fragment loading during workflow execution
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Domain-specific testing patterns (vs project-specific artifacts like PRDs/stories)
- **Optional MCP integration**: Healing, exploratory, and verification modes for enhanced testing capabilities
This architecture enables TEA to maintain consistent, production-ready testing patterns across all BMad projects while operating across multiple development phases.
</details>
## 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 + epics) | PRD, epics |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*test-design` (system-level, recommended) | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (testability review) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0 | Run `*framework`, `*ci` based on test-design-system.md | Setup repo structure, dependencies | Test scaffold, CI pipeline, development environment |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` (epic-level, auto-detected) | 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>
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect creates architecture document; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, auto-detected) for testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` to setup test infrastructure. This is implementation work (scaffolding code, installing dependencies, configuring CI), not planning.
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to create epic-specific test plan. 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.
</details>
<details>
<summary>Worked Example "Nova CRM" Greenfield Feature</summary>
1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to produce PRD and epics.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` defining tech stack; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode) producing `test-design-system.md` with testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up test infrastructure via `*framework` and `*ci` based on test-design-system.md; team scaffolds repo structure and dependencies.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
5. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) to create test plan for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` with risk assessment.
6. **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.
7. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
8. **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:**
- Phase 0 (Documentation) - Document existing codebase if undocumented
- Phase 2: `*trace` - Baseline existing test coverage before planning
- 🔄 Phase 3: `*test-design` (system-level) - Includes brownfield testability concerns
- 🔄 Phase 4 Sprint 0: `*framework`, `*ci` - May integrate with/replace existing test setup
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` (epic-level) - 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 |
| ----------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 0**: Documentation | - | 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 + epics) | PRD, epics, coverage baseline |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*test-design` (system-level, recommended) 🔄 | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (brownfield testability review) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0 | Run `*framework`, `*ci` based on test-design-system.md 🔄 | Modernize/integrate test setup | Test scaffold, CI pipeline (may replace existing) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint status file with all epics and stories |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` (epic-level) 🔄 (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)**: Architect creates architecture document; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, auto-detected) for testability review including brownfield concerns; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` to modernize test infrastructure. For brownfield, this may integrate with or replace existing test setup.
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to identify regression hotspots, integration risks, and mitigation strategies. 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 update PRD and `epics.md` (Epic 1: Payment Processing); TEA runs `*trace` to baseline existing coverage.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect triggers `*architecture` capturing legacy payment flows and integration architecture; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode) producing `test-design-system.md` with brownfield testability review; gate check validates planning.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` based on test-design-system.md, integrating with existing test setup; team modernizes infrastructure.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load Epic 1 into sprint status.
5. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` that flags settlement edge cases, regression hotspots, and mitigation plans.
6. **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.
7. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA applies `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
8. **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 3: `*test-design` (system-level) - **Required** for enterprise (vs recommended for Method)
- 🔄 Phase 4 Sprint 0: `*framework`, `*ci` - Enterprise-grade configurations
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` (epic-level) - 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 + epics), UX `*create-design` | Enterprise PRD, epics, UX design, NFR documentation |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning | Run `*test-design` (system-level, **required**) 🔄 | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (enterprise testability) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0 | Run `*framework`, `*ci` with enterprise configs 🔄 | Setup enterprise infrastructure | Test scaffold, CI pipeline (selective testing, burn-in, caching) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning | - | SM `*sprint-planning` | Sprint plan with all epics |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning | Run `*test-design` (epic-level) 🔄 (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)**: Architect creates architecture document with enterprise considerations; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, **required** for enterprise) for comprehensive testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations (selective testing, burn-in jobs, caching, notifications).
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to create enterprise-focused test plan 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 and epics; TEA runs `*nfr-assess` to establish NFR targets.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` with enterprise considerations; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode, required) producing `test-design-system.md` with comprehensive testability review; gate check validates planning completeness.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations based on test-design-system.md; team establishes infrastructure.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
5. **Per-Epic (Phase 4):** For each epic, TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) to create epic-specific test plan (e.g., `test-design-epic-1.md`, `test-design-epic-2.md`) with compliance-focused risk assessment.
6. **Per-Story (Phase 4):** For each story, TEA uses `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, and `*trace`; Dev teams iterate on the findings.
7. **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>
## 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