engineering-team/playwright-pro/skills/testrail/SKILL.md
Sync tests with TestRail. Use when user mentions "testrail", "test management", "test cases", "test run", "sync test cases", "push results to testrail", or "import from testrail".
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills testrailInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Bidirectional sync between Playwright tests and TestRail test management.
Environment variables must be set:
TESTRAIL_URL — e.g., https://your-instance.testrail.ioTESTRAIL_USER — your emailTESTRAIL_API_KEY — API key from TestRailIf not set, inform the user how to configure them and stop.
/pw:testrail import --project <id> --suite <id>
Steps:
testrail_get_cases MCP tool to fetch test casestest.info().annotations.push({ type: 'testrail', description: 'C12345' })/pw:testrail push --run <id>
Steps:
npx playwright test --reporter=json > test-results.json
testrail_add_result MCP tool for each test:
/pw:testrail run --project <id> --name "Sprint 42 Regression"
Steps:
testrail_add_run MCP tool/pw:testrail status --project <id>
Steps:
TestRail cases: 150
Playwright tests with TestRail IDs: 120
Unlinked TestRail cases: 30
Playwright tests without TestRail IDs: 15
/pw:testrail update --case <id>
Steps:
testrail_update_case MCP tool to update steps| Tool | When |
|---|---|
| testrail_get_projects | List available projects |
| testrail_get_suites | List suites in project |
| testrail_get_cases | Read test cases |
| testrail_add_case | Create new test case |
| testrail_update_case | Update existing case |
| testrail_add_run | Create test run |
| testrail_add_result | Push individual result |
| testrail_get_results | Read historical results |
All Playwright tests linked to TestRail include:
test('should login successfully', async ({ page }) => {
test.info().annotations.push({
type: 'testrail',
description: 'C12345',
});
// ... test code
});
This annotation is the bridge between Playwright and TestRail.
tools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.