Gen Test Plan

Analyze repo, detect stack, trace changes to user-facing entry points, generate E2E YAML test plan

Install

openclaw skills install gen-test-plan

Generate Test Plan

Analyze the repository's tech stack, branch changes vs default, and generate an executable YAML test plan focused on user-facing impact.

This is an E2E test plan — not an automated test wrapper. The generated plan will be executed by an autonomous agent acting exactly as a human QA tester would: launching real binaries, hitting real endpoints, interacting with real databases, and verifying real observable behavior.

Critical Rule: No Automated Test Duplication

NEVER generate test steps that re-run the project's existing automated test suite. This means:

No cargo test, pytest, npm test, go test, mix test, or equivalent commands as test steps
No wrapping unit/integration test modules in a test case
No "run the tests and check they pass" — that's CI's job, not QA's

If you find yourself writing a test step that invokes the project's test runner, stop and rethink. Ask: "What would a human tester do to verify this feature works?" The answer is never "run the unit tests."

What E2E test steps look like:

Build the binary and run it with real arguments, check stdout/stderr/exit code
Start a server and hit it with curl
Run a CLI command that writes to a real database, then query the database to verify
Launch the TUI and verify it renders (via screenshot or process lifecycle)
Chain multiple commands that exercise a full user workflow end-to-end

Hard gates

Complete these in order. Do not advance to the next gate until its Pass condition is met (each pass should leave retrievable evidence: pasted command output, a written list, or the generated file on disk). Scheduling: Gate 1 before Step 2; Gate 2 before Step 5; Gate 3 before Step 7; Gates 4–5 during Step 8 (after the Step 7 summary).

Diff and base pinned (after Step 1) — Resolve the base branch from --base when provided, otherwise use the repo default (main or master per Step 1). Compare HEAD to $(git merge-base HEAD origin/<base_branch>) (or equivalent if the remote ref differs). Pass: You record current_branch, base_branch, the merge-base SHA or range used, and changed_files from git diff --name-only <merge-base>..HEAD (empty list allowed if you paste or quote that output and state “no file changes vs base”).
Trace complete (after Step 4) — Pass: Every affected entry point you will test has a Core functionality vs Configuration/admin classification, and the Step 4 requirement holds: at least one test targets a core entry point or you document why that is impossible and flag manual review.
Plan file valid (after Step 6, before Step 7) — Pass: docs/testing/test-plan.yaml exists and the following command exits 0 (parses the YAML and asserts all four top-level keys are present — a single grep -E with alternations would pass on any one match, so do not substitute it):
```
python3 -c "import sys, yaml; d = yaml.safe_load(open('docs/testing/test-plan.yaml')) or {}; missing = [k for k in ('version', 'metadata', 'setup', 'tests') if k not in d]; sys.exit('Missing keys: ' + ', '.join(missing) if missing else 0)"
```
No automated-test duplication (Step 8) — Pass: Every run: step and every services: command: is scanned for project test runners (cargo test, pytest, npm test, go test, mix test, jest, vitest, mocha, etc.); zero invocations. If any appear, remove or replace them with real E2E actions and re-run Gate 3.
Behavioral coverage (Step 8) — Pass: Re-read metadata.changes_summary and recent commit messages; at least one test’s context/steps exercises the primary user-visible behavior they describe. If they describe a capability (e.g., a new provider) but no step invokes it, add that test or fail verification.

Arguments

--base <branch>: Base branch to diff against (default: main)
Path: Target directory (default: current working directory)

Step 1: Gather Repository Context

# Get current branch
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD

# Resolve base branch: use --base if supplied, otherwise default (main → master)
BASE_BRANCH="${BASE_BRANCH:-$(git rev-parse --verify origin/main >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo main || echo master)}"
MERGE_BASE="$(git merge-base HEAD "origin/${BASE_BRANCH}")"

# Get changed files vs base
git diff --name-only "${MERGE_BASE}"..HEAD

# Get commit messages for context
git log --oneline "${MERGE_BASE}"..HEAD

Capture:

current_branch: Branch name
base_branch: Default branch to compare against
changed_files: List of modified files
commit_messages: What the PR is about

Step 2: Detect Tech Stack

See references/stack-discovery.md for stack detection commands, entrypoint discovery, port discovery, and trace rules.

Step 3: Discover User-Facing Entry Points

A "user-facing entry point" is anything a human interacts with: CLI subcommands, HTTP endpoints, UI routes, TUI screens, gRPC services, database migrations, or configuration files that affect runtime behavior.

CLI Applications (Rust/clap, Python/argparse/click, Go/cobra)

# Rust (clap) — look for Subcommand derives and command enums
grep -rn "Subcommand\|#\[command\]" --include="*.rs" | head -20

# Python (click/typer/argparse)
grep -rn "@click.command\|@app.command\|add_parser\|add_subparser" --include="*.py" | head -20

# Go (cobra)
grep -rn "cobra.Command\|AddCommand" --include="*.go" | head -20

Build a map of:

CLI subcommands: command name + description + file:line
Required arguments and flags per subcommand
Environment variables the binary reads (grep for env, std::env::var, os.Getenv, os.environ)

HTTP/API Services

Python (FastAPI/Flask):

grep -rn "@app\.\(get\|post\|put\|delete\|patch\)" --include="*.py" | head -20
grep -rn "@router\.\(get\|post\|put\|delete\|patch\)" --include="*.py" | head -20

Node.js (Express/Fastify):

grep -rn "app\.\(get\|post\|put\|delete\)" --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" | head -20
grep -rn "router\.\(get\|post\|put\|delete\)" --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" | head -20

Rust (axum/actix/rocket):

grep -rn "Router::new\|\.route(\|#\[get\]\|#\[post\]\|HttpServer" --include="*.rs" | head -20

Go (net/http, gin, chi):

grep -rn "http.HandleFunc\|r.GET\|r.POST\|router.Get\|router.Post" --include="*.go" | head -20

Elixir (Phoenix):

grep -rn "get \"/\|post \"/\|pipe_through\|live \"/\|scope \"/\"" --include="*.ex" | head -20

Browser UI Routes

grep -rn "createBrowserRouter\|<Route\|path=" --include="*.tsx" --include="*.jsx" | head -20

Database and Migrations

# SQL migrations
ls migrations/ db/migrate/ priv/repo/migrations/ 2>/dev/null
# Schema files
ls schema.sql schema.prisma 2>/dev/null

Build a consolidated map of:

CLI subcommands: name + args + file:line
API endpoints: method + path + file:line
UI routes: path + component + file:line
Database migrations: filename + what they create/alter
Configuration: env vars and config files that affect behavior

Step 4: Trace Changes to Entry Points

For each changed file, determine if it affects user-facing functionality:

Direct entry point change — File contains route definitions
Import chain analysis — Find what imports the changed file and trace up to entry points
Architecture-aware tracing — Read the project's CLAUDE.md, README, or architecture docs to understand data flow and module relationships, rather than relying solely on grep
Document the trace path in test context

Import Chain Analysis by Ecosystem

# Rust — use/mod/crate references and workspace deps
grep -rn "use.*<crate>\|mod <module>" --include="*.rs"
grep -rn "<crate-name>" --include="Cargo.toml"

# Python — from/import
grep -rn "from.*<module>\|import.*<module>" --include="*.py"

# TypeScript/JavaScript — import/require
grep -rn "from.*<module>\|require.*<module>" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx" --include="*.js" --include="*.jsx"

# Elixir — alias/import/use
grep -rn "alias.*<Module>\|import.*<Module>\|use.*<Module>" --include="*.ex" --include="*.exs"

# Go — package references
grep -rn "<package>\." --include="*.go"

If the ecosystem is not covered above, or grep results are inconclusive, read the project's CLAUDE.md, README, or architecture docs to understand the module graph and trace the data flow from changed files to user-facing entry points.

Classify Affected Entry Points

After identifying all affected entry points, classify each one:

Category	Description	Examples	Priority
Core functionality	Entry points where the feature does its actual work for the end user	Chat endpoint, API action, data processing pipeline, generation flow	High — test first
Configuration/admin	Entry points where the feature is set up, toggled, or configured	Settings page, admin dashboard, preference toggles, dropdown selections	Lower — test after core

Classification rules:

Ask: "If a user wanted to use this feature (not configure it), which entry point would they interact with?" — that's core functionality
A settings page that adds a new dropdown option is configuration; the endpoint that actually uses that option is core functionality
The same changed file (e.g., a new provider module) may affect both a settings page and a functional endpoint — both must be traced

Requirement: At least one test must target a core functionality entry point before generating configuration/admin tests. If no core functionality entry point can be identified, explicitly document why and flag this for manual review.

Output: For each affected entry point, document:

Which changed files affect it
The import/dependency chain
Classification: Core functionality or Configuration/admin
Why this entry point needs testing

Step 5: Generate Test Cases

See references/test-case-generation.md for the detailed API/browser templates, prioritization rules, and test-case guidelines.

Step 6: Write YAML Test Plan

Create the test plan file:

mkdir -p docs/testing

Write to docs/testing/test-plan.yaml:

version: 1
metadata:
  branch: <current_branch>
  base: <base_branch>
  generated: <ISO timestamp>
  changes_summary: |
    <Summary of what this PR changes based on commit messages and diff>

setup:
  stack:
    - type: <rust|node|python|go|elixir|docker>
      package_manager: <cargo|pnpm|npm|yarn|uv|poetry|mix|none>
  prerequisites:
    # Services or infrastructure the tests need running
    - name: <e.g., PostgreSQL>
      check: <command to verify it's available, e.g., "pg_isready -h localhost">
  build:
    # Commands to build the project artifacts (binaries, assets, etc.)
    - <build command, e.g., "cargo build --workspace">
  services:
    # Long-running processes to start before tests (servers, watchers, etc.)
    # Omit if the project is a CLI tool or library with no server component
    - command: <start command>
      health_check:
        url: http://localhost:<port>/health
        timeout: 30
  env:
    # Environment variables needed by tests (use ${VAR} for secrets)
    DATABASE_URL: "${DATABASE_URL}"

tests:
  # CLI test example — run the built binary with real arguments:
  - id: TC-01
    name: <CLI test name>
    context: |
      <Why this test exists, which changes affect it>
    steps:
      - run: <command that a human would type in their terminal>
      - run: <follow-up command to verify the effect>
    expected: |
      <Expected behavior: exit code, stdout content, side effects>

  # API test example:
  - id: TC-02
    name: <API test name>
    context: |
      <Why this test exists, which changes affect it>
    steps:
      - action: curl
        method: GET
        url: http://localhost:<port>/<path>
    expected: |
      <Expected behavior in natural language>

  # Database verification example:
  - id: TC-03
    name: <Database test name>
    context: |
      <Why this test exists, which changes affect it>
    steps:
      - run: <command that writes to the database>
      - run: psql "${DATABASE_URL}" -c "SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ..."
    expected: |
      <Expected rows, schema state, or migration effect>

  # Browser test example (always use agent-browser CLI commands):
  - id: TC-04
    name: <UI test name>
    context: |
      <Why this test exists, which changes affect it>
    steps:
      - run: agent-browser open http://localhost:<port>/<path>
      - run: agent-browser snapshot -i
      - run: agent-browser click @<ref>
      - run: agent-browser snapshot -i
      - run: agent-browser screenshot evidence/tc-04.png
    expected: |
      <Expected behavior in natural language>
    evidence:
      screenshot: evidence/tc-04.png

Step 7: Report Summary

After generating the test plan:

## Test Plan Generated

**File:** `docs/testing/test-plan.yaml`
**Branch:** <current_branch> → <base_branch>

### Detected Stack

| Component | Type | Port |
|-----------|------|------|
| <component> | <type> | <port> |

### Tests Generated

| ID | Name | Type | Affected By |
|----|------|------|-------------|
| TC-01 | <name> | curl/browser | <files> |

### Entry Point Coverage

- **Covered:** <N> entry points with tests
- **Unchanged:** <M> entry points not affected by this PR

### Next Steps

1. Review the generated test plan at `docs/testing/test-plan.yaml`
2. Adjust test values and expectations as needed
3. Run the tests by invoking the **run-test-plan** skill ([run-test-plan](../run-test-plan/SKILL.md))

Step 8: Verification

Confirm Hard gates 1–5 are satisfied with evidence (see Hard gates above) before treating the plan as complete. Then run:

# Verify file was created
ls -la docs/testing/test-plan.yaml

# Validate YAML syntax
python3 -c "import yaml; yaml.safe_load(open('docs/testing/test-plan.yaml'))" && echo "Valid YAML"

# Check required fields
grep -E "^version:|^metadata:|^setup:|^tests:" docs/testing/test-plan.yaml

Verification Checklist:

Test plan file created at docs/testing/test-plan.yaml
YAML is syntactically valid
At least one test case generated
Setup commands match detected stack
Each test has id, name, steps, and expected fields
No automated test duplication: Grep every run: and command: step in the plan for test runner invocations (cargo test, pytest, npm test, go test, mix test, jest, vitest, mocha, etc.). If ANY step invokes the project's test runner, the plan fails verification. Remove those steps and replace them with real E2E actions.
Behavioral coverage: At least one test exercises the primary behavioral change described in changes_summary. Re-read the changes_summary and commit messages — if they describe a capability (e.g., "adds a new LLM provider") but no test invokes that capability (e.g., sends a message through the provider), the plan fails verification. Add the missing core functionality test before completing.
No config-only plans: If all tests target configuration/admin entry points and zero tests target core functionality entry points, the plan is incomplete. Go back to Step 4, identify the core functionality entry points, and add tests for them.

Rules

E2E only — every test step must exercise the real built artifact (binary, server, UI) as a human would. Never wrap automated test suites.
Always create docs/testing/ directory if it doesn't exist
Generate at least one test per affected entry point
Include context explaining why each test matters (trace from changes)
Use natural language for expected field (agent will interpret)
CLI projects: Test steps should invoke the actual binary with real arguments and verify stdout, stderr, exit codes, and side effects (files created, database rows written, processes spawned)
Server projects: Start the server in setup, test via curl/agent-browser
Library-only projects with no binary or server: If the change is purely internal library code with no user-facing entry point (no CLI, no server, no UI), state this explicitly and generate tests that exercise the library through its public API via a small driver script — not by running the test suite
Default to conservative port detection (8000 for API, 5173/3000 for frontend)
Browser automation steps MUST use agent-browser CLI commands (e.g., agent-browser open, agent-browser snapshot -i, agent-browser click @ref) — never use abstract action syntax
Always agent-browser snapshot -i before interacting with elements and after navigation/DOM changes
Use agent-browser screenshot <path> to capture evidence for browser tests
Use ${ENV_VAR} syntax for secrets, never hardcode credentials
If no user-facing changes detected, explain why and suggest manual verification