Frontend E2e User Journeys Samjhecht Wrangler

---
name: frontend-e2e-user-journeys
description: Use when implementing critical user workflows that span multiple pages/components - tests complete journeys end-to-end using Page Object Model, user-centric selectors, and condition-based waiting; use sparingly (10-15% of tests)
---

# Frontend E2E User Journeys

## Skill Usage Announcement

**MANDATORY**: When using this skill, announce it at the start with:

```
🔧 Using Skill: frontend-e2e-user-journeys | [brief purpose based on context]
```

**Example:**
```
🔧 Using Skill: frontend-e2e-user-journeys | [Provide context-specific example of what you're doing]
```

This creates an audit trail showing which skills were applied during the session.



## Overview

End-to-end (E2E) tests verify complete user workflows from start to finish, including multiple pages, API requests, and database state.

**When to use this skill:**
- Implementing critical user workflows (login, checkout, signup)
- Testing cross-page journeys (onboarding wizard)
- Verifying third-party integrations (OAuth, payments)
- Testing business-critical flows (cancel subscription, refund)

**When NOT to use:**
- Component-level behavior → Use component tests
- Edge cases → Use unit tests
- Variations of same flow → Use parameterized tests
- Rapid iteration → E2E tests too slow

## The Iron Law

```
E2E TESTS ONLY FOR CRITICAL USER JOURNEYS
```

**Rule of thumb**: If manual QA would test it end-to-end, automate it at E2E level. Otherwise, test at lower level.

**Target**: E2E tests should be 10-15% of total test suite (not more).

## When to Write E2E Tests

### Use E2E Tests For:

**Critical user workflows:**
- ✓ User signup → Email verification → First login
- ✓ Add to cart → Checkout → Payment → Order confirmation
- ✓ Login → Browse products → Add to wishlist
- ✓ Create account → Set preferences → Verify email → Login

**Cross-page workflows:**
- ✓ Multi-step wizards (onboarding, configuration)
- ✓ Shopping cart persistence across pages
- ✓ Authentication flow across entire app

**Third-party integrations:**
- ✓ OAuth login (Google, GitHub, etc.)
- ✓ Payment processing (Stripe, PayPal)
- ✓ Email verification flows

**Business-critical flows:**
- ✓ Cancel subscription
- ✓ Refund order
- ✓ Delete account

### DON'T Use E2E Tests For:

- ✗ Edge cases (test at unit level)
- ✗ Component behavior (test with component tests)
- ✗ Validation logic (test at unit level)
- ✗ Every permutation (test logic separately)
- ✗ Rapid development iteration (too slow)

**Decision Tree:**

```
Is this a complete user workflow?
├─ YES → Continue
│   ├─ Is it business-critical?
│   │   ├─ YES → E2E test appropriate
│   │   └─ NO → Could this be component test?
│   └─ NO → Use component or unit test
└─ NO → Use component or unit test
```

## Page Object Model Pattern

**Encapsulate page interactions in reusable classes:**

### Why Page Objects?

**Benefits:**
- Single source of truth for selectors
- Easy to update when UI changes
- Readable tests (domain language)
- Works with Playwright, Selenium, Puppeteer

**Pattern:**

```typescript
// pages/LoginPage.ts
export class LoginPage {
  constructor(private page: Page) {}

  // Locators (encapsulated)
  private get emailInput() {
    return this.page.locator('[name="email"]');
  }

  private get passwordInput() {
    return this.page.locator('[name="password"]');
  }

  private get submitButton() {
    return this.page.locator('button[type="submit"]');
  }

  // High-level actions (domain language)
  async goto() {
    await this.page.goto('/login');
  }

  async login(email: string, password: string) {
    await this.emailInput.fill(email);
    await this.passwordInput.fill(password);
    await this.submitButton.click();
  }

  async getErrorMessage(): Promise<string | null> {
    const alert = this.page.locator('[role="alert"]');
    return await alert.textContent();
  }

  async isLoggedIn(): Promise<boolean> {
    return await this.page.locator('[data-testid="user-menu"]').isVisible();
  }
}
```

### Using Page Objects in Tests

```typescript
// tests/login.spec.ts
test('user can log in with valid credentials', async ({ page }) => {
  const loginPage = new LoginPage(page);

  await loginPage.goto();
  await loginPage.login('test@example.com', 'password123');

  expect(await loginPage.isLoggedIn()).toBe(true);
  await expect(page).toHaveURL('/dashboard');
});

test('shows error for invalid credentials', async ({ page }) => {
  const loginPage = new LoginPage(page);

  await loginPage.goto();
  await loginPage.login('test@example.com', 'wrongpassword');

  const error = await loginPage.getErrorMessage();
  expect(error).toContain('Invalid credentials');
});
```

**Benefits visible:**
- Test code is readable (domain language)
- Selectors encapsulated (change once, tests still work)
- Actions reusable (login used in multiple tests)

## User-Centric Selectors

**Select elements the way users find them:**

### Priority Order (Testing Library Guidance)

```typescript
// 1. BEST: Accessible selectors (what screen readers see)
page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Submit' });
page.getByRole('heading', { name: 'Welcome' });
page.getByLabel('Email address');

// 2. GOOD: Semantic selectors (visible text)
page.getByText('Click here to continue');
page.getByPlaceholder('Enter your name');
page.getByAltText('Company logo');

// 3. ACCEPTABLE: Test IDs (when no semantic option)
page.locator('[data-testid="checkout-form"]');

// 4. NEVER: Implementation details (brittle)
page.locator('.btn-primary-lg-v2');  // CSS classes
page.locator('div > div > button:nth-child(3)');  // Element hierarchy
page.locator('#component-instance-xyz');  // Internal IDs
```

### Why User-Centric Selectors Matter

**Resilience:**
- Tests survive refactoring
- CSS changes don't break tests
- Component restructuring doesn't break tests

**Accessibility verification:**
- If button has no accessible name, test fails
- Forces proper ARIA labels
- Ensures screen reader compatibility

**Readability:**
- "Click Submit button" not "Click .btn-xyz"
- Tests read like user instructions
- Easier to understand and maintain

### Examples

```typescript
// ❌ BAD: CSS selectors (brittle)
await page.click('.btn-primary.btn-lg');

// ✅ GOOD: Accessible selector (resilient)
await page.click('button[name="submit"]');

// ❌ BAD: Element hierarchy (brittle)
await page.fill('div.form > div:nth-child(2) > input');

// ✅ GOOD: Semantic selector (resilient)
await page.fill('input[name="email"]');
// OR
await page.getByLabel('Email address').fill('test@example.com');
```

## Condition-Based Waiting

**Always wait for conditions, not arbitrary times:**

### The Anti-Pattern

```typescript
// ❌ BAD: Guessing at timing
await page.click('button');
await page.waitForTimeout(500);  // Hope response in 500ms
const result = await page.textContent('.result');
```

**Problems:**
- Flaky tests (fails when slow)
- Slow tests (waits longer than needed)
- No guarantee condition met

### The Solution

```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Wait for condition
await page.click('button');
await page.waitForSelector('.result');  // Wait until appears
const result = await page.textContent('.result');

// ✅ BETTER: Wait for specific state
await page.click('button');
await page.waitForResponse(resp => resp.url().includes('/api/submit'));
await page.waitForSelector('.result:has-text("Success")');
```

### Framework-Agnostic Waiting

**Playwright:**
```typescript
await page.waitForSelector('.element');
await page.waitForResponse(resp => resp.url().includes('/api'));
await page.waitForFunction(() => document.querySelector('.element'));
```

**Selenium:**
```typescript
import { until } from 'selenium-webdriver';
await driver.wait(until.elementLocated(By.css('.element')));
await driver.wait(until.elementIsVisible(element));
```

**Cypress:**
```typescript
cy.get('.element').should('be.visible');  // Built-in retry
cy.intercept('/api/data').as('getData');
cy.wait('@getData');
```

**See**: condition-based-waiting skill for comprehensive guidance.

## Test Data Management

### Use Factories or Fixtures

```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Reusable test data factory
async function createTestUser(overrides = {}) {
  return await db.users.create({
    email: `test-${Date.now()}@example.com`,
    password: 'password123',
    name: 'Test User',
    ...overrides
  });
}

// Each test creates its own data
test('user can update profile', async ({ page }) => {
  const user = await createTestUser();

  // ... test using user
  await loginPage.login(user.email, user.password);

  // Cleanup
  await db.users.delete(user.id);
});
```

### Test Isolation

**Each test must be independent:**

```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Each test sets up and tears down
test('test A', async () => {
  const user = await createTestUser();
  // ... test
  await cleanup(user);
});

test('test B', async () => {
  const user = await createTestUser();
  // ... test
  await cleanup(user);
});

// ❌ BAD: Tests share data (flaky)
const sharedUser = await createTestUser();

test('test A', async () => {
  // Uses sharedUser - what if test B modified it?
});
```

### Unique Test Data

```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Unique data per test
email: `test-${Date.now()}-${Math.random()}@example.com`

// ✅ GOOD: Use UUIDs
import { randomUUID } from 'crypto';
email: `test-${randomUUID()}@example.com`
```

## Complete E2E Test Structure

### Pattern: Arrange-Act-Assert-Cleanup

```typescript
test('user can complete checkout', async ({ page }) => {
  // ARRANGE: Set up test data
  const user = await createTestUser();
  const product = await createTestProduct();

  // ACT: Perform user workflow
  const loginPage = new LoginPage(page);
  await loginPage.goto();
  await loginPage.login(user.email, user.password);

  const productPage = new ProductPage(page);
  await productPage.goto(product.id);
  await productPage.addToCart();

  const checkoutPage = new CheckoutPage(page);
  await checkoutPage.goto();
  await checkoutPage.fillShippingInfo({
    address: '123 Main St',
    city: 'Seattle',
    zip: '98101'
  });
  await checkoutPage.fillPaymentInfo({
    cardNumber: '4242424242424242',
    expiry: '12/25',
    cvc: '123'
  });
  await checkoutPage.submitOrder();

  // ASSERT: Verify outcome
  await expect(page.locator('[data-testid="order-confirmation"]'))
    .toContainText('Order placed successfully');

  // Verify database state
  const order = await db.orders.findByUserId(user.id);
  expect(order.status).toBe('confirmed');
  expect(order.total).toBe(product.price);

  // CLEANUP: Remove test data
  await db.orders.delete(order.id);
  await db.users.delete(user.id);
  await db.products.delete(product.id);
});
```

## API Mocking (When Needed)

**Mock external services, not your own API:**

```typescript
// ✅ GOOD: Mock external payment provider
test('handles payment failure', async ({ page }) => {
  await page.route('https://api.stripe.com/v1/charges', route => {
    route.fulfill({
      status: 400,
      body: JSON.stringify({
        error: { message: 'Card declined' }
      })
    });
  });

  // ... attempt checkout

  await expect(page.locator('[role="alert"]'))
    .toContainText('Payment failed: Card declined');
});

// ❌ BAD: Mocking your own API (defeats purpose)
test('shows user profile', async ({ page }) => {
  await page.route('/api/users/123', route => {
    route.fulfill({ body: JSON.stringify({ name: 'Alice' })});
  });
  // Not testing real API integration!
});
```

## Framework Examples

### Playwright (Recommended)

```typescript
import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test';

test('user signup flow', async ({ page }) => {
  await page.goto('/signup');

  await page.fill('[name="email"]', 'test@example.com');
  await page.fill('[name="password"]', 'password123');
  await page.fill('[name="confirmPassword"]', 'password123');
  await page.click('button[type="submit"]');

  await expect(page).toHaveURL('/verify-email');
  await expect(page.locator('h1')).toContainText('Check your email');
});
```

### Selenium

```typescript
import { Builder, By, until } from 'selenium-webdriver';

test('user signup flow', async () => {
  const driver = await new Builder().forBrowser('chrome').build();

  try {
    await driver.get('http://localhost:3000/signup');

    await driver.findElement(By.name('email')).sendKeys('test@example.com');
    await driver.findElement(By.name('password')).sendKeys('password123');
    await driver.findElement(By.css('button[type="submit"]')).click();

    await driver.wait(until.urlContains('/verify-email'));
    const heading = await driver.findElement(By.css('h1')).getText();
    expect(heading).toContain('Check your email');
  } finally {
    await driver.quit();
  }
});
```

### Cypress

```typescript
describe('User signup flow', () => {
  it('allows user to sign up', () => {
    cy.visit('/signup');

    cy.get('[name="email"]').type('test@example.com');
    cy.get('[name="password"]').type('password123');
    cy.get('[name="confirmPassword"]').type('password123');
    cy.get('button[type="submit"]').click();

    cy.url().should('include', '/verify-email');
    cy.get('h1').should('contain', 'Check your email');
  });
});
```

## Mandatory Verification Checklist

BEFORE claiming E2E test complete:

### Test Design
- [ ] Tests critical user journey (not component behavior)
- [ ] Uses Page Object Model (not raw selectors)
- [ ] Uses user-centric selectors (accessible roles/labels)
- [ ] Waits for conditions (not arbitrary timeouts)
- [ ] Test data is unique per test
- [ ] Test cleans up after itself

### Test Execution
- [ ] Test passes consistently (run 10 times)
- [ ] Test fails when expected (verify negative cases)
- [ ] Test runs in reasonable time (<30 seconds)
- [ ] Test doesn't depend on other tests

### Test Quality
- [ ] Page Objects encapsulate selectors
- [ ] Actions have clear domain names
- [ ] Tests read like user instructions
- [ ] Assertions verify user-visible outcomes

**If ANY checkbox unchecked**: E2E test is incomplete or incorrect.

## Red Flags - STOP IMMEDIATELY

If you catch yourself:
- Writing E2E tests for component behavior
- Testing every edge case at E2E level
- Using CSS class selectors
- Using `waitForTimeout()` with arbitrary values
- Sharing test data between tests
- Not using Page Objects (raw selectors everywhere)
- E2E tests taking >1 minute each
- E2E tests are >20% of total test suite

THEN:
- STOP immediately
- Consider if E2E is appropriate level
- Use Page Objects and user-centric selectors
- Fix test isolation and waiting issues

## E2E Testing with TDD

E2E tests CAN follow TDD, but require incremental approach:

### Approach 1: Incremental E2E (Recommended)

Build E2E test one page at a time following TDD:

**Iteration 1: Login Page**

RED:
```typescript
test('user can log in', async ({ page }) => {
  await page.goto('/login');
  await page.fill('[name="email"]', 'test@example.com');
  await page.fill('[name="password"]', 'password123');
  await page.click('button[type="submit"]');

  await expect(page).toHaveURL('/dashboard'); // FAILS - login doesn't work
});
```

GREEN: Implement login page and authentication

REFACTOR: Improve login page code

**Iteration 2: Add to Cart**

RED:
```typescript
test('user can add product to cart', async ({ page }) => {
  // Reuse login from iteration 1
  await loginPage.goto();
  await loginPage.login('test@example.com', 'password123');

  // New functionality (RED - doesn't exist yet)
  await page.goto('/product/123');
  await page.click('button[name="add-to-cart"]');

  await expect(page.locator('.cart-badge')).toHaveText('1'); // FAILS
});
```

GREEN: Implement add to cart functionality

REFACTOR: Improve cart code

**Iteration 3-5: Continue incrementally**

---

### Approach 2: Skeleton E2E First (Alternative)

Write skeleton E2E test with all steps, expect ALL to fail:

RED:
```typescript
test('complete checkout flow', async ({ page }) => {
  // Step 1: Login (exists)
  await loginPage.login('test@example.com', 'password123');
  await expect(page).toHaveURL('/dashboard');

  // Step 2: Add to cart (doesn't exist - will fail here)
  await page.goto('/product/123');
  await page.click('button[name="add-to-cart"]');

  // Step 3: Checkout (doesn't exist)
  await page.goto('/checkout');
  await checkoutPage.fillShippingInfo({...});

  // Step 4: Payment (doesn't exist)
  await checkoutPage.fillPaymentInfo({...});
  await checkoutPage.submitOrder();

  // Step 5: Confirmation (doesn't exist)
  await expect(page.locator('.order-confirmation')).toBeVisible();
});
```

Run test: FAILS at step 2 (add to cart doesn't exist)

GREEN: Implement add to cart
Run test: FAILS at step 3 (checkout doesn't exist)

GREEN: Implement checkout
Run test: FAILS at step 4 (payment doesn't exist)

... continue until all steps implemented

**When to use each approach:**
- Incremental: When iterating rapidly, want fast feedback
- Skeleton: When have complete flow spec, want to track overall progress

**Both approaches follow TDD**: Write test, watch fail, implement, watch pass.

**Cross-reference:** See test-driven-development skill for core RED-GREEN-REFACTOR principles.

---

## Integration with Other Skills

**Combines with:**
- test-driven-development: Write E2E test BEFORE implementing flow (see E2E TDD section above)
- condition-based-waiting: Wait for conditions, not time
- verification-before-completion: E2E tests required for critical flows
- frontend-component-testing: Use component tests for most UI testing
- frontend-accessibility-verification: E2E tests verify accessible selectors

## Testing Pyramid Guidance

**Modern frontend testing distribution:**

```
       /\
      /E2E\       10-15% - Critical journeys only
     /------\
    /Integration\  40-50% - Highest ROI
   /------------\
  /  Component  \  30-40% - User behavior
 /--------------\
/     Unit      \  5-10% - Pure logic
/----------------\
```

**E2E tests should be the SMALLEST portion** of your test suite.

## Common Rationalizations

| Rationalization | Counter |
|----------------|---------|
| "I need E2E test for every feature" | No. Use component tests. E2E for critical journeys only. |
| "E2E tests are more thorough" | They're slower and more brittle. Higher ROI at component level. |
| "I don't have time for Page Objects" | You'll spend more time maintaining brittle tests. |
| "CSS selectors are easier" | They break on every UI change. Use accessible selectors. |
| "I'll add timeouts to make it stable" | That's covering up race conditions. Wait for conditions. |

## Example Session

```
Agent: "I'm implementing user checkout flow."

[Uses frontend-e2e-user-journeys skill]

1. Determine if E2E appropriate:
   - Complete workflow? YES (add to cart → checkout → payment)
   - Business critical? YES (checkout is revenue-critical)
   - Could be component test? NO (spans multiple pages)
   → E2E test appropriate

2. Create Page Objects:
   - ProductPage (for adding to cart)
   - CheckoutPage (for checkout form)
   - ConfirmationPage (for order confirmation)

3. Write E2E test with TDD:
   - RED: Write test expecting checkout flow works
   - GREEN: Implement checkout flow
   - REFACTOR: Improve code, E2E test catches regressions

4. Use user-centric selectors:
   - button[name="add-to-cart"]
   - input[name="cardNumber"]
   - [role="alert"] (for error messages)

5. Wait for conditions:
   - waitForResponse('/api/checkout')
   - waitForSelector('[data-testid="confirmation"]')

6. Test isolation:
   - Create unique test user
   - Create unique test product
   - Clean up after test

7. Verify test:
   - Runs in <30s
   - Passes 10 times consecutively
   - Fails when expected (invalid card)

"Checkout E2E test complete. Critical user journey verified."
```

## References

- Page Object Model: Industry standard pattern
- Testing Library philosophy: User-centric testing
- Playwright: Built-in support for E2E testing
- condition-based-waiting skill: Comprehensive waiting guidance

---

**Remember**: E2E TESTS ONLY FOR CRITICAL USER JOURNEYS. Use component tests for most UI testing.