bmad-studio 0.1.0

package/_bmad/tea/workflows/testarch/bmad-testarch-test-design/test-design-handoff-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+---
+title: 'TEA Test Design → BMAD Handoff Document'
+version: '1.0'
+workflowType: 'testarch-test-design-handoff'
+inputDocuments: []
+sourceWorkflow: 'testarch-test-design'
+generatedBy: 'TEA Master Test Architect'
+generatedAt: '{timestamp}'
+projectName: '{project_name}'
+---
+
+# TEA → BMAD Integration Handoff
+
+## Purpose
+
+This document bridges TEA's test design outputs with BMAD's epic/story decomposition workflow (`create-epics-and-stories`). It provides structured integration guidance so that quality requirements, risk assessments, and test strategies flow into implementation planning.
+
+## TEA Artifacts Inventory
+
+| Artifact             | Path                      | BMAD Integration Point                               |
+| -------------------- | ------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- |
+| Test Design Document | `{test_design_path}`      | Epic quality requirements, story acceptance criteria |
+| Risk Assessment      | (embedded in test design) | Epic risk classification, story priority             |
+| Coverage Strategy    | (embedded in test design) | Story test requirements                              |
+
+## Epic-Level Integration Guidance
+
+### Risk References
+
+<!-- TEA will populate: P0/P1 risks that should appear as epic-level quality gates -->
+
+### Quality Gates
+
+<!-- TEA will populate: recommended quality gates per epic based on risk assessment -->
+
+## Story-Level Integration Guidance
+
+### P0/P1 Test Scenarios → Story Acceptance Criteria
+
+<!-- TEA will populate: critical test scenarios that MUST be acceptance criteria -->
+
+### Data-TestId Requirements
+
+<!-- TEA will populate: recommended data-testid attributes for testability -->
+
+## Risk-to-Story Mapping
+
+| Risk ID | Category | P×I | Recommended Story/Epic | Test Level |
+| ------- | -------- | --- | ---------------------- | ---------- |
+
+<!-- TEA will populate from risk assessment -->
+
+## Recommended BMAD → TEA Workflow Sequence
+
+1. **TEA Test Design** (`TD`) → produces this handoff document
+2. **BMAD Create Epics & Stories** → consumes this handoff, embeds quality requirements
+3. **TEA ATDD** (`AT`) → generates acceptance tests per story
+4. **BMAD Implementation** → developers implement with test-first guidance
+5. **TEA Automate** (`TA`) → generates full test suite
+6. **TEA Trace** (`TR`) → validates coverage completeness
+
+## Phase Transition Quality Gates
+
+| From Phase          | To Phase            | Gate Criteria                                          |
+| ------------------- | ------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
+| Test Design         | Epic/Story Creation | All P0 risks have mitigation strategy                  |
+| Epic/Story Creation | ATDD                | Stories have acceptance criteria from test design      |
+| ATDD                | Implementation      | Failing acceptance tests exist for all P0/P1 scenarios |
+| Implementation      | Test Automation     | All acceptance tests pass                              |
+| Test Automation     | Release             | Trace matrix shows ≥80% coverage of P0/P1 requirements |

package/_bmad/tea/workflows/testarch/bmad-testarch-test-design/test-design-qa-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,396 @@
+---
+stepsCompleted: []
+lastStep: ''
+lastSaved: ''
+workflowType: 'testarch-test-design'
+inputDocuments: []
+---
+
+# Test Design for QA: {Feature Name}
+
+**Purpose:** Test execution recipe for QA team. Defines what to test, how to test it, and what QA needs from other teams.
+
+**Date:** {date}
+**Author:** {author}
+**Status:** Draft
+**Project:** {project_name}
+
+**Related:** See Architecture doc (test-design-architecture.md) for testability concerns and architectural blockers.
+
+---
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+**Scope:** {Brief description of testing scope}
+
+**Risk Summary:**
+
+- Total Risks: {N} ({X} high-priority score ≥6, {Y} medium, {Z} low)
+- Critical Categories: {Categories with most high-priority risks}
+
+**Coverage Summary:**
+
+- P0 tests: ~{N} (critical paths, security)
+- P1 tests: ~{N} (important features, integration)
+- P2 tests: ~{N} (edge cases, regression)
+- P3 tests: ~{N} (exploratory, benchmarks)
+- **Total**: ~{N} tests (~{X}-{Y} weeks with 1 QA)
+
+---
+
+## Not in Scope
+
+**Components or systems explicitly excluded from this test plan:**
+
+| Item       | Reasoning                   | Mitigation                                                                      |
+| ---------- | --------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **{Item}** | {Why excluded from testing} | {How risk is mitigated, e.g., "validated manually", "covered by upstream team"} |
+
+**Note:** Items listed here have been reviewed and accepted as out-of-scope by QA, Dev, and PM.
+
+---
+
+## Dependencies & Test Blockers
+
+**CRITICAL:** QA cannot proceed without these items from other teams.
+
+### Backend/Architecture Dependencies (Pre-Implementation)
+
+**Source:** See Architecture doc "Quick Guide" for detailed mitigation plans
+
+1. **{Dependency 1}** - {Team} - {Timeline}
+   - {What QA needs}
+   - {Why it blocks testing}
+
+2. **{Dependency 2}** - {Team} - {Timeline}
+   - {What QA needs}
+   - {Why it blocks testing}
+
+### QA Infrastructure Setup (Pre-Implementation)
+
+1. **Test Data Factories** - QA
+   - {Entity} factory with faker-based randomization
+   - Auto-cleanup fixtures for parallel safety
+
+2. **Test Environments** - QA
+   - Local: {Setup details}
+   - CI/CD: {Setup details}
+   - Staging: {Setup details}
+
+**Example factory pattern:**
+
+```typescript
+import { test } from '@seontechnologies/playwright-utils/api-request/fixtures';
+import { expect } from '@playwright/test';
+import { faker } from '@faker-js/faker';
+
+test('example test @p0', async ({ apiRequest }) => {
+  const testData = {
+    id: `test-${faker.string.uuid()}`,
+    email: faker.internet.email(),
+  };
+
+  const { status } = await apiRequest({
+    method: 'POST',
+    path: '/api/resource',
+    body: testData,
+  });
+
+  expect(status).toBe(201);
+});
+```
+
+---
+
+## Risk Assessment
+
+**Note:** Full risk details in Architecture doc. This section summarizes risks relevant to QA test planning.
+
+### High-Priority Risks (Score ≥6)
+
+| Risk ID    | Category | Description         | Score       | QA Test Coverage             |
+| ---------- | -------- | ------------------- | ----------- | ---------------------------- |
+| **{R-ID}** | {CAT}    | {Brief description} | **{Score}** | {How QA validates this risk} |
+
+### Medium/Low-Priority Risks
+
+| Risk ID | Category | Description         | Score   | QA Test Coverage             |
+| ------- | -------- | ------------------- | ------- | ---------------------------- |
+| {R-ID}  | {CAT}    | {Brief description} | {Score} | {How QA validates this risk} |
+
+---
+
+## Entry Criteria
+
+**QA testing cannot begin until ALL of the following are met:**
+
+- [ ] All requirements and assumptions agreed upon by QA, Dev, PM
+- [ ] Test environments provisioned and accessible
+- [ ] Test data factories ready or seed data available
+- [ ] Pre-implementation blockers resolved (see Dependencies section)
+- [ ] Feature deployed to test environment
+- [ ] {Additional project-specific entry criteria}
+
+## Exit Criteria
+
+**Testing phase is complete when ALL of the following are met:**
+
+- [ ] All P0 tests passing
+- [ ] All P1 tests passing (or failures triaged and accepted)
+- [ ] No open high-priority / high-severity bugs
+- [ ] Test coverage agreed as sufficient by QA Lead and Dev Lead
+- [ ] Performance baselines met (if applicable)
+- [ ] {Additional project-specific exit criteria}
+
+---
+
+## Project Team (Optional)
+
+**Include only if roles/names are known or responsibility mapping is needed; otherwise omit.**
+
+| Name   | Role      | Testing Responsibilities                                      |
+| ------ | --------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| {Name} | QA Lead   | Test strategy, E2E/API test implementation, test review       |
+| {Name} | Dev Lead  | Unit tests, integration test support, testability hooks       |
+| {Name} | PM        | Requirements clarification, acceptance criteria, UAT sign-off |
+| {Name} | Architect | Testability review, NFR guidance, environment provisioning    |
+
+---
+
+## Test Coverage Plan
+
+**IMPORTANT:** P0/P1/P2/P3 = **priority and risk level** (what to focus on if time-constrained), NOT execution timing. See "Execution Strategy" for when tests run.
+
+### P0 (Critical)
+
+**Criteria:** Blocks core functionality + High risk (≥6) + No workaround + Affects majority of users
+
+| Test ID    | Requirement   | Test Level | Risk Link | Notes   |
+| ---------- | ------------- | ---------- | --------- | ------- |
+| **P0-001** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {R-ID}    | {Notes} |
+| **P0-002** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {R-ID}    | {Notes} |
+
+**Total P0:** ~{N} tests
+
+---
+
+### P1 (High)
+
+**Criteria:** Important features + Medium risk (3-4) + Common workflows + Workaround exists but difficult
+
+| Test ID    | Requirement   | Test Level | Risk Link | Notes   |
+| ---------- | ------------- | ---------- | --------- | ------- |
+| **P1-001** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {R-ID}    | {Notes} |
+| **P1-002** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {R-ID}    | {Notes} |
+
+**Total P1:** ~{N} tests
+
+---
+
+### P2 (Medium)
+
+**Criteria:** Secondary features + Low risk (1-2) + Edge cases + Regression prevention
+
+| Test ID    | Requirement   | Test Level | Risk Link | Notes   |
+| ---------- | ------------- | ---------- | --------- | ------- |
+| **P2-001** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {R-ID}    | {Notes} |
+
+**Total P2:** ~{N} tests
+
+---
+
+### P3 (Low)
+
+**Criteria:** Nice-to-have + Exploratory + Performance benchmarks + Documentation validation
+
+| Test ID    | Requirement   | Test Level | Notes   |
+| ---------- | ------------- | ---------- | ------- |
+| **P3-001** | {Requirement} | {Level}    | {Notes} |
+
+**Total P3:** ~{N} tests
+
+---
+
+## Execution Strategy
+
+**Philosophy:** Run everything in PRs unless there's significant infrastructure overhead. Playwright with parallelization is extremely fast (100s of tests in ~10-15 min).
+
+**Organized by TOOL TYPE:**
+
+### Every PR: Playwright Tests (~10-15 min)
+
+**All functional tests** (from any priority level):
+
+- All E2E, API, integration, unit tests using Playwright
+- Parallelized across {N} shards
+- Total: ~{N} Playwright tests (includes P0, P1, P2, P3)
+
+**Why run in PRs:** Fast feedback, no expensive infrastructure
+
+### Nightly: k6 Performance Tests (~30-60 min)
+
+**All performance tests** (from any priority level):
+
+- Load, stress, spike, endurance tests
+- Total: ~{N} k6 tests (may include P0, P1, P2)
+
+**Why defer to nightly:** Expensive infrastructure (k6 Cloud), long-running (10-40 min per test)
+
+### Weekly: Chaos & Long-Running (~hours)
+
+**Special infrastructure tests** (from any priority level):
+
+- Multi-region failover (requires AWS Fault Injection Simulator)
+- Disaster recovery (backup restore, 4+ hours)
+- Endurance tests (4+ hours runtime)
+
+**Why defer to weekly:** Very expensive infrastructure, very long-running, infrequent validation sufficient
+
+**Manual tests** (excluded from automation):
+
+- DevOps validation (deployment, monitoring)
+- Finance validation (cost alerts)
+- Documentation validation
+
+---
+
+## QA Effort Estimate
+
+**QA test development effort only** (excludes DevOps, Backend, Data Eng, Finance work):
+
+| Priority  | Count | Effort Range       | Notes                                             |
+| --------- | ----- | ------------------ | ------------------------------------------------- |
+| P0        | ~{N}  | ~{X}-{Y} weeks     | Complex setup (security, performance, multi-step) |
+| P1        | ~{N}  | ~{X}-{Y} weeks     | Standard coverage (integration, API tests)        |
+| P2        | ~{N}  | ~{X}-{Y} days      | Edge cases, simple validation                     |
+| P3        | ~{N}  | ~{X}-{Y} days      | Exploratory, benchmarks                           |
+| **Total** | ~{N}  | **~{X}-{Y} weeks** | **1 QA engineer, full-time**                      |
+
+**Assumptions:**
+
+- Includes test design, implementation, debugging, CI integration
+- Excludes ongoing maintenance (~10% effort)
+- Assumes test infrastructure (factories, fixtures) ready
+
+**Dependencies from other teams:**
+
+- See "Dependencies & Test Blockers" section for what QA needs from Backend, DevOps, Data Eng
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Planning Handoff (Optional)
+
+**Include only if this test design produces implementation tasks that must be scheduled.**
+
+**Use this to inform implementation planning; if no dedicated QA, assign to Dev owners.**
+
+| Work Item   | Owner        | Target Milestone (Optional) | Dependencies/Notes |
+| ----------- | ------------ | --------------------------- | ------------------ |
+| {Work item} | {QA/Dev/etc} | {Milestone or date}         | {Notes}            |
+| {Work item} | {QA/Dev/etc} | {Milestone or date}         | {Notes}            |
+
+---
+
+## Tooling & Access
+
+**Include only if non-standard tools or access requests are required.**
+
+| Tool or Service   | Purpose   | Access Required | Status            |
+| ----------------- | --------- | --------------- | ----------------- |
+| {Tool or Service} | {Purpose} | {Access needed} | {Ready / Pending} |
+| {Tool or Service} | {Purpose} | {Access needed} | {Ready / Pending} |
+
+**Access requests needed (if any):**
+
+- [ ] {Access to request}
+
+---
+
+## Interworking & Regression
+
+**Services and components impacted by this feature:**
+
+| Service/Component | Impact              | Regression Scope                | Validation Steps              |
+| ----------------- | ------------------- | ------------------------------- | ----------------------------- |
+| **{Service}**     | {How it's affected} | {What existing tests must pass} | {How to verify no regression} |
+
+**Regression test strategy:**
+
+- {Describe which existing test suites must pass before release}
+- {Note any cross-team coordination needed for regression validation}
+
+---
+
+## Appendix A: Code Examples & Tagging
+
+**Playwright Tags for Selective Execution:**
+
+```typescript
+import { test } from '@seontechnologies/playwright-utils/api-request/fixtures';
+import { expect } from '@playwright/test';
+
+// P0 critical test
+test('@P0 @API @Security unauthenticated request returns 401', async ({ apiRequest }) => {
+  const { status, body } = await apiRequest({
+    method: 'POST',
+    path: '/api/endpoint',
+    body: { data: 'test' },
+    skipAuth: true,
+  });
+
+  expect(status).toBe(401);
+  expect(body.error).toContain('unauthorized');
+});
+
+// P1 integration test
+test('@P1 @Integration data syncs correctly', async ({ apiRequest }) => {
+  // Seed data
+  await apiRequest({
+    method: 'POST',
+    path: '/api/seed',
+    body: {
+      /* test data */
+    },
+  });
+
+  // Validate
+  const { status, body } = await apiRequest({
+    method: 'GET',
+    path: '/api/resource',
+  });
+
+  expect(status).toBe(200);
+  expect(body).toHaveProperty('data');
+});
+```
+
+**Run specific tags:**
+
+```bash
+# Run only P0 tests
+npx playwright test --grep @P0
+
+# Run P0 + P1 tests
+npx playwright test --grep "@P0|@P1"
+
+# Run only security tests
+npx playwright test --grep @Security
+
+# Run all Playwright tests in PR (default)
+npx playwright test
+```
+
+---
+
+## Appendix B: Knowledge Base References
+
+- **Risk Governance**: `risk-governance.md` - Risk scoring methodology
+- **Test Priorities Matrix**: `test-priorities-matrix.md` - P0-P3 criteria
+- **Test Levels Framework**: `test-levels-framework.md` - E2E vs API vs Unit selection
+- **Test Quality**: `test-quality.md` - Definition of Done (no hard waits, <300 lines, <1.5 min)
+
+---
+
+**Generated by:** BMad TEA Agent
+**Workflow:** `_bmad/tea/testarch/bmad-testarch-test-design`
+**Version:** 4.0 (BMad v6)