What problem does it solve?
Reviewing Cypress end-to-end test specs by hand is slow and inconsistent — reviewers miss flaky patterns like numeric waits, unscoped text selectors, and hardcoded IDs, and rarely assess whether a test should be an e2e test at all. This Skill applies a structured checklist and pattern table to catch convention violations, flakiness risks, and wasted CI time in every review.
Core Features & Use Cases
- Convention and anti-pattern review: Scans specs against a detailed checklist covering selectors, helpers, waits, assertions,
cy.within usage, and Cypress framework anti-patterns, with a quick-scan pattern matching table.
- Dual review modes: Posts issues as a cohesive pending GitHub PR review when MCP GitHub tools are available, or outputs a numbered issue list for local reviews.
- E2E-vs-unit cost analysis: Every report ends with an honest breakdown of which tests genuinely need a browser plus backend and which belong in cheaper Jest + RTL unit tests, grounded in CI timing data from
e2e/support/timings.json.
- Use Case: When reviewing a pull request that adds a new spec under
e2e/test/scenarios/, invoke this Skill to get numbered, actionable issues plus a recommendation on which tests to push down to the unit layer.
Quick Start
Review the Cypress spec changes in this pull request for Metabase e2e conventions, flakiness risks, and whether each test belongs in e2e.