Skip to content
Back to skills

Economical Visual Tests

ASecurity

Author economical visual tests — full visual coverage in the fewest billable snapshots. Applies to any per-snapshot visual tool (UI Verify, Chromatic, Percy, Playwright screenshots), which all bill and diff per rendered story/test. Use when a component's variants/states are exploding into one snapshot per combination, when the visual-testing bill or noise is driven by snapshot count, or when writing new stories/captures and you want the cheapest layout that still covers every variant. Covers ...

  • 1,200 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 20, 2026
ai-agentstesting

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 20, 2026

npx -y skills add FranciscoMoretti/chat-js --skill economical-visual-tests --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Economical Visual Tests?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Economical Visual Tests
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/franciscomoretti-economical-visual-tests/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/franciscomoretti-economical-visual-tests)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: economical-visual-tests
description: Author economical visual tests — full visual coverage in the fewest billable snapshots. Applies to any per-snapshot visual tool (UI Verify, Chromatic, Percy, Playwright screenshots), which all bill and diff per rendered story/test. Use when a component's variants/states are exploding into one snapshot per combination, when the visual-testing bill or noise is driven by snapshot count, or when writing new stories/captures and you want the cheapest layout that still covers every variant. Covers gallery/matrix stories, data-driven states, and the coarse-granularity tradeoff.
---

# Author economical visual tests

Every per-snapshot visual tool — UI Verify, Chromatic, Percy, Playwright screenshots — renders and bills **per story**. So the number of stories _is_ the cost and the noise surface. The naive pattern (one story per variant × state × theme) multiplies both fast: a component with 5 sizes × 3 states × 2 themes is **30 snapshots** the naive way. This skill collapses that to a handful while keeping full coverage.

The technique is tool-agnostic; the payoff (fewer billed shots, fewer places to flake) is the same everywhere.

## Move 1 — one "all variants" gallery story, not N stories

Render the whole matrix **together** in a single story: a grid of every size/state side by side. One snapshot then covers the entire matrix.

```tsx
// Button.stories.tsx — ONE story covers every size × variant
export const AllVariants = () => (
  <div
    style={{
      display: "grid",
      gap: 16,
      gridTemplateColumns: "repeat(3, max-content)",
    }}
  >
    {(["sm", "md", "lg"] as const).flatMap((size) =>
      (["primary", "secondary", "danger"] as const).map((variant) => (
        <Button key={`${size}-${variant}`} size={size} variant={variant}>
          {size}/{variant}
        </Button>
      ))
    )}
  </div>
);
```

9 buttons, **1 snapshot** instead of 9.

## Move 2 — drive states from data/props, not from N stories

For a component that normally _fetches_, don't write a story per response state. Render each state from a fixed fixture — a table of props/mock-responses — in one story. Deterministic input in, deterministic pixels out, many states, few shots.

```tsx
const CASES: { label: string; items?: Item[]; error?: string }[] = [
  { label: "empty", items: [] },
  { label: "one", items: [fixtures.one] },
  { label: "many", items: fixtures.many },
  { label: "error", error: "Failed to load" },
];

export const AllStates = () => (
  <div style={{ display: "grid", gap: 24 }}>
    {CASES.map((c) => (
      <section key={c.label}>
        <h4>{c.label}</h4>
        <List items={c.items} error={c.error} />
      </section>
    ))}
  </div>
);
```

(If the component fetches internally rather than taking props, mock the request instead — see `storybook-visual-testing`, "mock data." The point is the same: fixtures, not N stories.)

## The tradeoff — say it out loud, don't just merge everything

Consolidating into one snapshot is **coarser granularity**: a diff _anywhere_ in the gallery flags the whole story, and you lose the per-variant baseline/accept. So this is a balance, not "merge everything":

- **Merge** variants that change together and share one component — a pure component matrix (sizes, states, themes of one Button). This is where consolidation wins cleanly.
- **Keep separate** genuinely independent surfaces — different pages, different flows, things that evolve on their own timelines. Collapsing those just couples unrelated diffs.
- UI Verify's AI review + per-region diff soften the coarse-granularity cost (it can tell you _which_ cell in the gallery moved), so lean toward consolidation for component matrices.

## Estimate the win

When you refactor, state the delta so the value is legible:

> This collapses **28 stories → 2 snapshots** (the size×variant×theme matrix into one gallery, the four data states into one story). ~93% fewer billed shots, same coverage.

## Anti-patterns

- **One story per prop combination** → gallery story (move 1).
- **One story per fetch state** (`Loading`, `Empty`, `Error`, `Loaded` as four stories) → one data-driven story (move 2).
- **Merging independent pages into one snapshot** → over-consolidation; you've coupled unrelated diffs. Keep those separate.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.