Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
待分类操作浏览器github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计异常

accelint-ac-to-playwrightaccelint AC TO Playwright 测试

Agent Skill

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。它适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。使用时需要确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑;涉及浏览器或外部服务时,应区分本地模拟、测试环境和生产环境。

总安装

1,536

周安装

64

GitHub Stars

10

下载量

512
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:accelint-ac-to-playwright(accelint AC TO Playwright 测试)
来源仓库:https://github.com/gohypergiant/agent-skills
仓库路径:skills/accelint-ac-to-playwright
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/gohypergiant/agent-skills --skill accelint-ac-to-playwright
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/gohypergiant/agent-skills --skill accelint-ac-to-playwright

简介

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证,支持编写单元测试或端到端测试。

  • 适用于根据失败日志定位问题,或生成测试计划,需结合项目测试框架使用。
  • 通过加载 AC 文件和测试钩子文档,自动处理验收准则到测试的转换。
  • 使用时需区分本地模拟与生产环境,避免修改真实逻辑,确保测试准确性。
  • accelint-ac-to-playwright 属于待分类类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

AC To Playwright

MANDATORY - READ ENTIRE FILE: Before processing ANY acceptance criteria, you MUST read references/acceptance-criteria.md (~175 lines) completely from start to finish. NEVER set any range limits when reading this file. It is the authoritative source for AC writing rules and mappings.

Note on test-hooks.md: Load references/test-hooks.md when converting AC → JSON plans or when running Assessment mode — it contains the controlled vocabulary for area/component/intent target naming patterns. Do NOT load when converting plans → tests (translation script handles this automatically).

Intent Detection

The skill supports two modes based on user phrasing:

Assessment mode (triggers on):

  • "review these AC"
  • "evaluate these AC"
  • "check if these AC are ready"
  • "can these AC be converted as-is"
  • "are these AC automation-ready"
  • "assess these acceptance criteria"

Full conversion mode (triggers on):

  • "convert these AC"
  • "generate tests from AC"
  • "turn AC into Playwright tests"
  • "create test automation"

Assessment mode analyzes AC text only (no artifact generation). Full conversion mode generates plans and tests.

Assessment Workflow

  1. Detect intent: User asks to review/evaluate/assess/check AC readiness.
  2. Prepare for the task:
  • Read references/acceptance-criteria.md and references/test-hooks.md.
  • Work one input file at a time.
  1. Analyze AC text against all conversion requirements:

- Structure & Format: - Bullet format: proper - markers for each AC - Gherkin format: valid Feature/Scenario/Examples/Given/When/Then/tags structure - Step ordering: all Givens → all Whens → all Thens (no mixing within a scenario) - Targets (semantic validation): - Every action specifies a target - Target meets the area/component/intent pattern (all three parts present) - Area matches controlled vocabulary from test-hooks.md (nav, header, footer, form, drawer, card, toast, modal, table, page, area) - Component matches controlled vocabulary (button, link, input, dropdown, checkbox, radio, text, div, component) - Intent is present - Actions: - Verbs are recognized and mappable to Playwright actions (click, fill, select, drag) - No vague verbs (interact, use, hover without x/y coordinates) - Fill/select actions have quoted literal values (not "a valid email" or "any value") - Expected Outcomes: - Explicitly stated (not implied or inferred) - Measurable (specific text content, element, or state) - Visibility changes use trigger words (appears, shows, hides, visible, see)

  1. Report results:

- If issues found: Report "❌ AC are not conversion-ready" with detailed issue list (see output format below) - If no issues: Report "✓ AC are conversion-ready" with validated checklist - Do NOT generate any files (no JSON plans, no test files) - Report results for all input files - do not stop Assessment mode after a single failure to ensure all issues are surfaced to the user at once.

Conversion Workflow

  1. Detect intent: User asks to generate/convert/write tests from AC files.
  2. Run Assessment mode:
  • Run Assessment mode against all input files and report pass/fail result.
  • If Assessment mode reported any failures across all files, STOP. Do not proceed with the rest of Conversion mode.
  1. Prepare for the task:
  • Require the user to explicitly provide output directories for plans, tests, and summaries before writing any files.
  • Read references/acceptance-criteria.md.
  • Work one input file at a time. Do not parallelize so that errors in one file's workflow do not affect other files' workflows.
  • Derive suite name, test names, startUrl, steps, targets, tags, and source metadata per the rules below.
  1. JSON test plan:
  • Build a JSON test plan that conforms to references/plan-schema.ts.
  • Validate the test plan and report results.
  • If validation failed, stop. Do not write the plan. Skip the rest of these steps for the current input file and move on to the next input file.
  • If validation passed, write the plan to the user-specified output directory: <plans-output-dir>/<suite-slug>.json.
  1. Translate the plan to tests:
  • Once the plan file is written, translate the plan with scripts/translate-plan-to-tests.ts.
  • Write the test suite file to the user-specified output directory: <tests-output-dir>/<suite-slug>.spec.ts.
  • Append a summary entry to the batch JSON file in the user-specified summary directory (one batch file per run).
  1. Next steps:
  • Work on the next input file, if any remain.
  • After all files are processed, ask the user if they would like a Playwright config template. If yes, copy skills/accelint-ac-to-playwright/assets/templates/playwright.config.ts into the user‑specified summaries location.

Recognition Patterns

Before processing AC, identify these quality signals:

Good AC (can process directly):

CheckQuestionIf NO → Action
TargetsDoes every action specify area.component.intent?Ask user to clarify which specific element
ValuesAre all fill/select values quoted literals?Ask user for exact values to use
OutcomesAre expectations measurable (specific text/element/state)?Ask user what exactly to verify

Bad patterns (ask the user questions):

  • "interact with" (and other similar language) → too vague, agent can't map to Playwright action
  • Dropdown: "select the first option" → fails, needs exact text
  • Always quote exact literals: 'test@example.com' not "a valid email"

The above table directs you to ask for clarifications because guessing creates tests that fail unpredictably.

Naming Transformations

Input to output mapping: One AC file → one suite → one plan file (<plans-dir>/<suite-slug>.json) → one test file

  • .md bullet-style: each - bullet = one test
  • .feature Gherkin: each Scenario = one test; each Examples row in Scenario Outline = one test
InputSuite NameTest NameOutput Slug
.featureFeature: text → lowercase → capitalize firstScenario text (lowercase, ~64 char limit) + (params) for Scenario Outlinessuite name → lowercase, spaces to dashes
.mdfilename → lowercase → dashes to spaces → capitalize firstSummarize bullet intent (present tense, lowercase, ~64 char)suite name → lowercase, spaces to dashes

Scenario Outline parameters: Use shortest left-to-right column combo that uniquely identifies each row, joined with /.

Example:

Examples:
  | username | password | message       |
  | user1    | pass1    | Welcome user1 |
  | user2    | pass2    | Welcome user2 |

Appends (user1/pass1) and (user2/pass2) respectively.

Tags (Gherkin only)

  • Feature-level tags -> suite tags.
  • Scenario-level tags -> test tags.
  • Do not include suite tags in test tags; drop duplicates at the test level.
  • If no test tags remain, omit tags field for that test.
  • Tag values include the leading '@'.

Source metadata

  • Always include a source object at suite level.
  • If AC file is inside a git repo: repo = repo name (folder containing .git), path = repo-relative path.
  • If AC file is not inside a git repo: repo = external, path = file basename only.
  • Do not store absolute paths.

Output Rules

Suite-level fields

  • Top-level field order: suiteName, tags (if any), source, tests.

Test-level fields

  • Start URL: always default to '/' unless the user provides an explicit starting page in a given AC per references/acceptance-criteria.md.
  • Steps: use only schema actions (but do not use goto) and preserve the order in the bullet text or in the Gherkin steps.

- Keyboard modifier combinations: When AC describes pressing a key combination (e.g., "press Shift+g", "press Control+Enter"), translate it into a three-step sequence: 1. keyDown with the modifier key (e.g., Shift, Control, or app-specific modifier a) 2. press with the non-modifier key (e.g., g, Enter) 3. keyUp with the same modifier key - Valid modifiers for keyDown/keyUp: Shift, Control, a (app-specific) - The press action only accepts single unmodified keys and should never receive combination syntax like Shift+g

  • Assertions:

- If navigation is triggered, add expectUrl using the Start URL mapping. - For visibility changes (e.g., visible/appears/shows/hides and similar wording), add expectNotVisible immediately before the action and expectVisible immediately after (or vice versa as appropriate). - Only add expectText / expectVisible / expectNotVisible when the AC explicitly names text or visibility. - Do not invent assertions. NEVER infer unstated information. Required fields that MUST be explicit (not inferred): - target: Must include area + component + intent - value: Must be quoted literal for fills - expected outcomes: Must include verifiable element/text

Resources

  • scripts/plan-schema.ts — schema and validation logic to consult when generating plans.
  • scripts/cli/validate-plan.ts — validator script for JSON plans (run via npx validate-plan after build).
  • scripts/translate-plan-to-tests.ts — converts a validated plan to a Playwright spec.
  • scripts/cli/generate-tests.ts — CLI wrapper for reading, validating, and writing spec files.

Validation and Retry Protocol

Use npx validate-plan path/to/plan.json to validate a plan against references/plan-schema.ts (after build).

Maximum attempts: 2 total (initial + 1 correction)

  1. Attempt 1: Generate JSON → validate
  • Pass → proceed to write file
  • Fail → go to Attempt 2
  1. Attempt 2: Read validation error → fix ONE specific issue → re-validate
  • Pass → proceed to write file
  • Fail → STOP, report error to user

NEVER:

  • Make multiple changes at once (fix one thing, validate, repeat)
  • Retry by rephrasing same JSON differently
  • Guess at schema requirements if error is unclear

Error Recovery

Error TypeDiagnostic QuestionCommon CausesFix Strategy
Schema validation failsWhat field does error message name?Wrong field order, missing required field, extra field not in schema, incorrect field typeCheck schema for exact field names and order; compare your JSON structure to schema requirements
Target naming invalidDoes target match area.component.intent?Wrong pattern structure, invalid keywords from controlled lists, missing dotsReview test-hooks.md for controlled vocabulary (area: nav/header/footer/etc, component: button/link/input/etc); use fallback keywords (last in each list) if AC term doesn't match
Translation script errorsWhich action/assertion caused failure?Unsupported action type, malformed target selector, missing required field in stepVerify action is in allowed list (click/fill/select); check target has all three parts; ensure step has target and any required fields (e.g., fill needs value)
Validation passes but tests failDo test hooks match actual page elements?Target selectors don't match DOM, wrong start URL, timing issuesAsk user to verify page structure matches expected targets; check if startUrl needs adjustment; consider if dynamic content needs wait conditions
Multiple validation failures after fixesDid first fix break something else?Making multiple speculative changes, misunderstanding schema requirementsStop after 2 attempts; report specific schema violations to user; ask if AC has ambiguities or if schema has changed

NEVER Do

  • NEVER generate artifacts in assessment mode — when the user asks to review/evaluate/assess AC, analyze the AC text only and provide the formatted report. Do not generate JSON plans or test files. Do not assume they want full conversion.
  • NEVER skip controlled vocabulary checks in assessment — verify that area and component keywords in targets match the lists in test-hooks.md.
  • NEVER use goto action in steps — tests start at startUrl, navigation happens via clicks or fills that trigger page changes. Using goto mid-test breaks Playwright's navigation lifecycle and causes race conditions where assertions run before the page is ready, leading to flaky tests that pass locally but fail in CI.
  • NEVER use doubleClick for element interactionsdoubleClick is only for coordinate-based double-clicks (x,y positions). For double-clicking elements, use the element-based click action twice in sequence. Only use doubleClick when AC explicitly specifies coordinates.
  • NEVER use mouseClick for element interactionsmouseClick is only for coordinate-based clicks (x,y positions). For clicking elements, always use click with test IDs. Only use mouseClick when AC explicitly specifies coordinates.
  • NEVER use mouseMove without a follow-up actionmouseMove positions the cursor but doesn't interact with anything. It should only be used before actions like mouseDown, mouseUp, mouseClick, or when AC explicitly requires moving to specific coordinates before other mouse operations.
  • NEVER use mouseDown or mouseUp without mouseMove first — these actions press/release buttons at the current cursor position. Always use mouseMove to position the cursor before mouseDown/mouseUp, otherwise the position is unpredictable.
  • NEVER invent assertions — only add expectText, expectVisible, expectNotVisible when AC explicitly states expected outcomes (exception: expectUrl for navigation, visibility pairs for show/hide actions)
  • NEVER store absolute file paths in source metadata — the expected convention is to use repo-relative paths for git repos, basename only for external files
  • NEVER assume targets or values — if AC says "click the button" without identifying which button, ask for clarification rather than guessing. Generic targets like button.generic bypass the controlled vocabulary system and create tests that break because they match multiple elements unpredictably.
  • NEVER skip validation — even if JSON looks correct, always run npx validate-plan before writing files to catch errors and reduce incorrect artifact cleanup
  • NEVER reuse existing plans or tests — this has caused problems in the past with changes being lost, so always regenerate all steps from AC source to ensure accuracy
  • NEVER write a plan file without validating first — validation catches structural errors; writing invalid plans creates broken artifacts requiring manual cleanup
  • NEVER process multiple steps of one file in parallel — complete the full pipeline (AC → plan → test → summary) for each file before moving to the next to avoid partial artifacts and state confusion
  • NEVER take shortcuts. - agents have gone off the rails when trying to define their own shortcuts, so when triggered you must always run the full workflow.

Assessment mode output format

When validation fails, report issues in this structure:

❌ AC are not conversion-ready. Issues found:

File: [filename]
1. [Line/Scenario reference]: [Specific issue]
   - Problem: [What's wrong]
   - Example: [Quote from AC]
   - Fix: [What needs to change]

File: [filename]
2. [Next issue...]

Example output:

❌ AC are not conversion-ready. Issues found:

File: form-actions.feature
1. Scenario "User submits form": Unknown action verb
   - Problem: "hovers" is not a recognized Playwright action
   - Example: "the user hovers over the tooltip"
   - Fix: Use a supported action (click, fill, select) or clarify the intent

File: login-flow.feature
2. Scenario "User logs in": Missing target intent
   - Problem: Test hook selector incomplete (button.form instead of button.form.submit)
   - Example: "clicks the button on the form"
   - Fix: Specify intent: "clicks the Submit button on the form"

When assessment passes:

✓ AC are conversion-ready

Validated ([X] AC in [Y] files):
- Structure: Proper format (bullets or Gherkin) with correct step ordering
- Targets: All meet the area/component/intent pattern with controlled vocabulary
- Actions: All verbs recognized (click/fill/select) with input values where required
- Expected outcomes: All explicitly stated and measurable
- Vocabulary: All areas/components match test-hooks.md keywords

These AC can be converted without modification.

Files analyzed:
[filename 1]
[filename 2]
...

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

36.85%
按下载量换算189

Claude

29.65%
按下载量换算152

Cursor

19.38%
按下载量换算99

Gemini CLI

9.16%
按下载量换算47

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

未通过

权限和风险

操作浏览器

该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills