BMAD-METHOD/.bmad/bmm/docs/test-architecture.md

---
last-redoc-date: 2025-11-05
---

# Test Architect (TEA) Agent Guide

## Overview

- **Persona:** Murat, Master Test Architect and Quality Advisor focused on risk-based testing, fixture architecture, ATDD, and CI/CD governance.
- **Mission:** Deliver actionable quality strategies, automation coverage, and gate decisions that scale with project complexity and compliance demands.
- **Use When:** BMad Method or Enterprise track projects, integration risk is non-trivial, brownfield regression risk exists, or compliance/NFR evidence is required. (Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA)

## TEA Workflow Lifecycle

TEA integrates into the BMad development lifecycle during Implementation (Phase 4):

```mermaid
%%{init: {'theme':'base', 'themeVariables': { 'primaryColor':'#fff','primaryTextColor':'#000','primaryBorderColor':'#000','lineColor':'#000','secondaryColor':'#fff','tertiaryColor':'#fff','fontSize':'16px','fontFamily':'arial'}}}%%
graph TB
    subgraph Phase2["<b>Phase 2: PLANNING</b>"]
        PM["<b>PM: *prd (creates PRD + epics)</b>"]
        PlanNote["<b>Business requirements phase</b>"]
        PM -.-> PlanNote
    end

    subgraph Phase3["<b>Phase 3: SOLUTIONING</b>"]
        Architecture["<b>Architect: *architecture</b>"]
        TestDesignSys["<b>TEA: *test-design (system-level)</b>"]
        ValidateArch["<b>Architect: *validate-architecture</b>"]
        GateCheck["<b>Architect: *solutioning-gate-check</b>"]
        Architecture --> TestDesignSys
        TestDesignSys --> ValidateArch
        ValidateArch --> GateCheck
        Phase3Note["<b>Testability review before gate</b><br/>Recommended: Method | Required: Enterprise"]
        TestDesignSys -.-> Phase3Note
    end

    subgraph Phase4["<b>Phase 4: IMPLEMENTATION</b>"]
        subgraph Sprint0["<b>Sprint 0: Infrastructure Setup</b>"]
            Framework["<b>TEA: *framework</b>"]
            CI["<b>TEA: *ci</b>"]
            Framework --> CI
            Sprint0Note["<b>Test infrastructure setup</b><br/>based on architectural decisions"]
            Framework -.-> Sprint0Note
        end

        SprintPlan["<b>SM: *sprint-planning</b>"]

        subgraph PerEpic["<b>Per Epic Cycle</b>"]
            TestDesign["<b>TEA: *test-design (per epic)</b>"]
            CreateStory["<b>SM: *create-story</b>"]
            ATDD["<b>TEA: *atdd (optional, before dev)</b>"]
            DevImpl["<b>DEV: implements story</b>"]
            Automate["<b>TEA: *automate</b>"]
            TestReview1["<b>TEA: *test-review (optional)</b>"]
            Trace1["<b>TEA: *trace (refresh coverage)</b>"]

            TestDesign --> CreateStory
            CreateStory --> ATDD
            ATDD --> DevImpl
            DevImpl --> Automate
            Automate --> TestReview1
            TestReview1 --> Trace1
            Trace1 -.->|next story| CreateStory
            TestDesignNote["<b>Test design: 'How do I test THIS epic?'</b><br/>Creates test-design-epic-N.md per epic"]
            TestDesign -.-> TestDesignNote
        end

        CI --> SprintPlan
        SprintPlan --> TestDesign
    end

    subgraph Gate["<b>EPIC/RELEASE GATE</b>"]
        NFR["<b>TEA: *nfr-assess (if not done earlier)</b>"]
        TestReview2["<b>TEA: *test-review (final audit, optional)</b>"]
        TraceGate["<b>TEA: *trace - Phase 2: Gate</b>"]
        GateDecision{"<b>Gate Decision</b>"}

        NFR --> TestReview2
        TestReview2 --> TraceGate
        TraceGate --> GateDecision
        GateDecision -->|PASS| Pass["<b>PASS ✅</b>"]
        GateDecision -->|CONCERNS| Concerns["<b>CONCERNS ⚠️</b>"]
        GateDecision -->|FAIL| Fail["<b>FAIL ❌</b>"]
        GateDecision -->|WAIVED| Waived["<b>WAIVED ⏭️</b>"]
    end

    Phase2 --> Phase3
    Phase3 --> Phase4
    Phase4 --> Gate

    style Phase2 fill:#bbdefb,stroke:#0d47a1,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Phase3 fill:#c8e6c9,stroke:#2e7d32,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Phase4 fill:#e1bee7,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Sprint0 fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
    style PerEpic fill:#f3e5f5,stroke:#6a1b9a,stroke-width:2px,color:#000
    style Gate fill:#ffe082,stroke:#f57c00,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Pass fill:#4caf50,stroke:#1b5e20,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Concerns fill:#ffc107,stroke:#f57f17,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Fail fill:#f44336,stroke:#b71c1c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
    style Waived fill:#9c27b0,stroke:#4a148c,stroke-width:3px,color:#000
```

**Phase Numbering Note:** BMad uses a 4-phase methodology with optional Phase 0/1:

- **Phase 0** (Optional): Documentation (brownfield prerequisite - `*document-project`)
- **Phase 1** (Optional): Discovery/Analysis (`*brainstorm`, `*research`, `*product-brief`)
- **Phase 2** (Required): Planning (`*prd` creates PRD + epics)
- **Phase 3** (Required): Solutioning (`*architecture` → `*validate-architecture` → `*solutioning-gate-check`)
- **Phase 4** (Required): Implementation
  - **Sprint 0**: Test infrastructure setup (`*framework`, `*ci`) based on architectural decisions
  - **Sprint Planning**: Load epics into sprint status
  - **Per-Epic**: `*test-design` → per-story dev workflows

**TEA workflows:** `*test-design` runs in Phase 3 (system-level testability review, recommended/required) and Phase 4 (per-epic planning). `*framework` and `*ci` run once in Phase 4 Sprint 0 (after architecture and testability are approved).

Quick Flow track skips Phases 0, 1, and 3. BMad Method and Enterprise use all phases based on project needs.

### Why TEA is Different from Other BMM Agents

TEA is the only BMM agent that operates in **both Phase 3 (Solutioning) and Phase 4 (Implementation)** and has its own **knowledge base architecture**.

<details>
<summary><strong>Cross-Phase Operation & Unique Architecture</strong></summary>

### Phase-Specific Agents (Standard Pattern)

Most BMM agents work in a single phase:

- **Phase 1 (Analysis)**: Analyst agent
- **Phase 2 (Planning)**: PM agent
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect agent
- **Phase 4 (Implementation)**: SM, DEV agents

### TEA: Cross-Phase Quality Agent (Unique Pattern)

TEA is **the only agent that operates in both Phase 3 (Solutioning) and Phase 4 (Implementation)**:

```
Phase 1 (Analysis) → [TEA not typically used]
    ↓
Phase 2 (Planning) → [PM defines requirements - TEA not active]
    ↓
Phase 3 (Solutioning) → TEA: *test-design (system-level testability review before gate)
    ↓
Phase 4 Sprint 0 → TEA: *framework, *ci (test infrastructure setup based on testability review)
    ↓
Phase 4 Sprint Planning → [SM loads epics into sprint status]
    ↓
Phase 4 Per-Epic → TEA: *test-design (per epic: "how do I test THIS feature?")
Phase 4 Per-Story → TEA: *atdd, *automate, *test-review, *trace (per story)
    ↓
Epic/Release Gate → TEA: *nfr-assess, *trace Phase 2 (release decision)
```

### TEA's 8 Workflows Across Phase 3-4

**Standard agents**: 1-3 workflows per phase
**TEA**: 8 workflows spanning Phase 3 Solutioning through Phase 4 Release Gate

| Phase                 | TEA Workflows                            | Frequency        | Purpose                                        |
| --------------------- | ---------------------------------------- | ---------------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 2**           | (none)                                   | -                | Planning phase - PM defines requirements       |
| **Phase 3**           | \*test-design (system-level)             | Once per project | Testability review before solutioning gate     |
| **Phase 4 Sprint 0**  | *framework, *ci                          | Once per project | Setup test infrastructure based on testability |
| **Phase 4 Per-Epic**  | \*test-design (epic-level)               | Per epic         | Test planning: "how do I test THIS epic?"      |
| **Phase 4 Per-Story** | *atdd, *automate, \*test-review, \*trace | Per story        | Test implementation and quality validation     |
| **Release Gate**      | *nfr-assess, *trace (Phase 2: gate)      | Per epic/release | Go/no-go decision                              |

**Note**: Like `*trace`, `*test-design` is now a dual-mode workflow: system-level mode (testability review in Phase 3) and epic-level mode (test planning in Phase 4). Auto-detects mode based on project phase.

### Unique Directory Architecture

TEA is the only BMM agent with its own top-level module directory (`bmm/testarch/`):

```
src/modules/bmm/
├── agents/
│   └── tea.agent.yaml          # Agent definition (standard location)
├── workflows/
│   └── testarch/               # TEA workflows (standard location)
└── testarch/                   # Knowledge base (UNIQUE!)
    ├── knowledge/              # 21 production-ready test pattern fragments
    ├── tea-index.csv           # Centralized knowledge lookup (21 fragments indexed)
    └── README.md               # This guide
```

### Why TEA Gets Special Treatment

TEA uniquely requires:

- **Extensive domain knowledge**: 21 fragments, 12,821 lines covering test patterns, CI/CD, fixtures, quality practices, healing strategies
- **Centralized reference system**: `tea-index.csv` for on-demand fragment loading during workflow execution
- **Cross-cutting concerns**: Domain-specific testing patterns (vs project-specific artifacts like PRDs/stories)
- **Optional MCP integration**: Healing, exploratory, and verification modes for enhanced testing capabilities

This architecture enables TEA to maintain consistent, production-ready testing patterns across all BMad projects while operating across multiple development phases.

</details>

## High-Level Cheat Sheets

These cheat sheets map TEA workflows to the **BMad Method and Enterprise tracks** across the **4-Phase Methodology** (Phase 1: Analysis, Phase 2: Planning, Phase 3: Solutioning, Phase 4: Implementation).

**Note:** Quick Flow projects typically don't require TEA (covered in Overview). These cheat sheets focus on BMad Method and Enterprise tracks where TEA adds value.

**Legend for Track Deltas:**

- ➕ = New workflow or phase added (doesn't exist in baseline)
- 🔄 = Modified focus (same workflow, different emphasis or purpose)
- 📦 = Additional output or archival requirement

### Greenfield - BMad Method (Simple/Standard Work)

**Planning Track:** BMad Method (PRD + Architecture)
**Use Case:** New projects with standard complexity

| Workflow Stage               | Test Architect                                                    | Dev / Team                                           | Outputs                                                    |
| ---------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery       | -                                                                 | Analyst `*product-brief` (optional)                  | `product-brief.md`                                         |
| **Phase 2**: Planning        | -                                                                 | PM `*prd` (creates PRD + epics)                      | PRD, epics                                                 |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning     | Run `*test-design` (system-level, recommended)                    | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (testability review) |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0        | Run `*framework`, `*ci` based on test-design-system.md            | Setup repo structure, dependencies                   | Test scaffold, CI pipeline, development environment        |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning | -                                                                 | SM `*sprint-planning`                                | Sprint status file with all epics and stories              |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning   | Run `*test-design` (epic-level, auto-detected)                    | Review epic scope                                    | `test-design-epic-N.md` with risk assessment and test plan |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev       | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after             | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements                   | Tests, story implementation                                |
| **Phase 4**: Story Review    | Execute `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace`                | Address recommendations, update code/tests           | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix                  |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate    | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2) | Confirm Definition of Done, share release notes      | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary                 |

<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>

- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect creates architecture document; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, auto-detected) for testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` to setup test infrastructure. This is implementation work (scaffolding code, installing dependencies, configuring CI), not planning.
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to create epic-specific test plan. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` before coding when the team can adopt ATDD; share its checklist with the dev agent.
- Post-implementation, keep `*trace` current, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`. For release gate, run `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to get deployment decision.
- Use `*test-review` after `*atdd` to validate generated tests, after `*automate` to ensure regression quality, or before gate for final audit.

</details>

<details>
<summary>Worked Example – "Nova CRM" Greenfield Feature</summary>

1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*product-brief`; PM executes `*prd` to produce PRD and epics.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` defining tech stack; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode) producing `test-design-system.md` with testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up test infrastructure via `*framework` and `*ci` based on test-design-system.md; team scaffolds repo structure and dependencies.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
5. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) to create test plan for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` with risk assessment.
6. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA optionally runs `*atdd`; Dev implements with guidance from failing tests.
7. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
8. **Release Gate:** TEA runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision.

</details>

### Brownfield - BMad Method or Enterprise (Simple or Complex)

**Planning Tracks:** BMad Method or Enterprise Method
**Use Case:** Existing codebases - simple additions (BMad Method) or complex enterprise requirements (Enterprise Method)

**🔄 Brownfield Deltas from Greenfield:**

- ➕ Phase 0 (Documentation) - Document existing codebase if undocumented
- ➕ Phase 2: `*trace` - Baseline existing test coverage before planning
- 🔄 Phase 3: `*test-design` (system-level) - Includes brownfield testability concerns
- 🔄 Phase 4 Sprint 0: `*framework`, `*ci` - May integrate with/replace existing test setup
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` (epic-level) - Focus on regression hotspots and brownfield risks
- 🔄 Phase 4: Story Review - May include `*nfr-assess` if not done earlier

| Workflow Stage                | Test Architect                                                               | Dev / Team                                           | Outputs                                                                |
| ----------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Phase 0**: Documentation ➕ | -                                                                            | Analyst `*document-project` (if undocumented)        | Comprehensive project documentation                                    |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery        | -                                                                            | Analyst/PM/Architect rerun planning workflows        | Updated planning artifacts in `{output_folder}`                        |
| **Phase 2**: Planning         | Run ➕ `*trace` (baseline coverage)                                          | PM `*prd` (creates PRD + epics)                      | PRD, epics, ➕ coverage baseline                                       |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning      | Run `*test-design` (system-level, recommended) 🔄                            | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (brownfield testability review)  |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0         | Run `*framework`, `*ci` based on test-design-system.md 🔄                    | Modernize/integrate test setup                       | Test scaffold, CI pipeline (may replace existing)                      |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning  | -                                                                            | SM `*sprint-planning`                                | Sprint status file with all epics and stories                          |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning    | Run `*test-design` (epic-level) 🔄 (regression hotspots)                     | Review epic scope and brownfield risks               | `test-design-epic-N.md` with brownfield risk assessment and mitigation |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev        | (Optional) `*atdd` before dev, then `*automate` after                        | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements                   | Tests, story implementation                                            |
| **Phase 4**: Story Review     | Apply `*test-review` (optional), re-run `*trace`, ➕ `*nfr-assess` if needed | Resolve gaps, update docs/tests                      | Quality report, refreshed coverage matrix, NFR report                  |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate     | (Optional) `*test-review` for final audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2)            | Capture sign-offs, share release notes               | Quality audit, Gate YAML + release summary                             |

<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>

- Lead with `*trace` during Planning (Phase 2) to baseline existing test coverage before architecture work begins.
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect creates architecture document; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, auto-detected) for testability review including brownfield concerns; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` to modernize test infrastructure. For brownfield, this may integrate with or replace existing test setup.
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to identify regression hotspots, integration risks, and mitigation strategies. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` when stories benefit from ATDD; otherwise proceed to implementation and rely on post-dev automation.
- After development, expand coverage with `*automate`, optionally review test quality with `*test-review`, re-run `*trace` (Phase 2 for gate decision). Run `*nfr-assess` now if non-functional risks weren't addressed earlier.
- Use `*test-review` to validate existing brownfield tests or audit new tests before gate.

</details>

<details>
<summary>Worked Example – "Atlas Payments" Brownfield Story</summary>

1. **Planning (Phase 2):** PM executes `*prd` to update PRD and `epics.md` (Epic 1: Payment Processing); TEA runs `*trace` to baseline existing coverage.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect triggers `*architecture` capturing legacy payment flows and integration architecture; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode) producing `test-design-system.md` with brownfield testability review; gate check validates planning.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` based on test-design-system.md, integrating with existing test setup; team modernizes infrastructure.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load Epic 1 into sprint status.
5. **Epic 1 Planning (Phase 4):** TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) for Epic 1, producing `test-design-epic-1.md` that flags settlement edge cases, regression hotspots, and mitigation plans.
6. **Story Implementation (Phase 4):** For each story in Epic 1, SM generates story via `*create-story`; TEA runs `*atdd` producing failing Playwright specs; Dev implements with guidance from tests and checklist.
7. **Post-Dev (Phase 4):** TEA applies `*automate`, optionally `*test-review` to audit test quality, re-runs `*trace` to refresh coverage.
8. **Release Gate:** TEA performs `*nfr-assess` to validate SLAs, runs `*trace` with Phase 2 enabled to generate gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL).

</details>

### Greenfield - Enterprise Method (Enterprise/Compliance Work)

**Planning Track:** Enterprise Method (BMad Method + extended security/devops/test strategies)
**Use Case:** New enterprise projects with compliance, security, or complex regulatory requirements

**🏢 Enterprise Deltas from BMad Method:**

- ➕ Phase 1: `*research` - Domain and compliance research (recommended)
- ➕ Phase 2: `*nfr-assess` - Capture NFR requirements early (security/performance/reliability)
- 🔄 Phase 3: `*test-design` (system-level) - **Required** for enterprise (vs recommended for Method)
- 🔄 Phase 4 Sprint 0: `*framework`, `*ci` - Enterprise-grade configurations
- 🔄 Phase 4: `*test-design` (epic-level) - Enterprise focus (compliance, security architecture alignment)
- 📦 Release Gate - Archive artifacts and compliance evidence for audits

| Workflow Stage               | Test Architect                                                           | Dev / Team                                           | Outputs                                                            |
| ---------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| **Phase 1**: Discovery       | -                                                                        | Analyst ➕ `*research`, `*product-brief`             | Domain research, compliance analysis, product brief                |
| **Phase 2**: Planning        | Run ➕ `*nfr-assess`                                                     | PM `*prd` (creates PRD + epics), UX `*create-design` | Enterprise PRD, epics, UX design, ➕ NFR documentation             |
| **Phase 3**: Solutioning     | Run `*test-design` (system-level, **required**) 🔄                       | Architect `*architecture`, `*solutioning-gate-check` | Architecture, `test-design-system.md` (enterprise testability)     |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint 0        | Run `*framework`, `*ci` with enterprise configs 🔄                       | Setup enterprise infrastructure                      | Test scaffold, CI pipeline (selective testing, burn-in, caching)   |
| **Phase 4**: Sprint Planning | -                                                                        | SM `*sprint-planning`                                | Sprint plan with all epics                                         |
| **Phase 4**: Epic Planning   | Run `*test-design` (epic-level) 🔄 (compliance focus)                    | Review epic scope and compliance requirements        | `test-design-epic-N.md` with security/performance/compliance focus |
| **Phase 4**: Story Dev       | (Optional) `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, `*trace` per story      | SM `*create-story`, DEV implements                   | Tests, fixtures, quality reports, coverage matrices                |
| **Phase 4**: Release Gate    | Final `*test-review` audit, Run `*trace` (Phase 2), 📦 archive artifacts | Capture sign-offs, 📦 compliance evidence            | Quality audit, updated assessments, gate YAML, 📦 audit trail      |

<details>
<summary>Execution Notes</summary>

- `*nfr-assess` runs early in Planning (Phase 2) to capture compliance, security, and performance requirements upfront.
- **Phase 3 (Solutioning)**: Architect creates architecture document with enterprise considerations; TEA runs `*test-design` (system-level mode, **required** for enterprise) for comprehensive testability review; gate check validates planning completeness including testability.
- **`*test-design` auto-detects mode**: In Phase 3 outputs `test-design-system.md`, in Phase 4 outputs `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- **Phase 4 Sprint 0**: After architecture is approved and testability validated, run `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations (selective testing, burn-in jobs, caching, notifications).
- **Phase 4 Sprint Planning**: After infrastructure is ready, sprint planning loads all epics.
- **`*test-design` runs per-epic** (Phase 4): At the beginning of each epic, run `*test-design` to create enterprise-focused test plan ensuring alignment with security architecture, performance targets, and compliance requirements. Output: `test-design-epic-N.md`.
- Use `*atdd` for stories when feasible so acceptance tests can lead implementation.
- Use `*test-review` per story or sprint to maintain quality standards and ensure compliance with testing best practices.
- Prior to release, rerun coverage (`*trace`, `*automate`), perform final quality audit with `*test-review`, and formalize the decision with `*trace` Phase 2 (gate decision); archive artifacts for compliance audits.

</details>

<details>
<summary>Worked Example – "Helios Ledger" Enterprise Release</summary>

1. **Planning (Phase 2):** Analyst runs `*research` and `*product-brief`; PM completes `*prd` creating PRD and epics; TEA runs `*nfr-assess` to establish NFR targets.
2. **Solutioning (Phase 3):** Architect completes `*architecture` with enterprise considerations; TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects system-level mode, required) producing `test-design-system.md` with comprehensive testability review; gate check validates planning completeness.
3. **Sprint 0 (Phase 4):** TEA sets up `*framework` and `*ci` with enterprise-grade configurations based on test-design-system.md; team establishes infrastructure.
4. **Sprint Planning (Phase 4):** Scrum Master runs `*sprint-planning` to load all epics into sprint status.
5. **Per-Epic (Phase 4):** For each epic, TEA runs `*test-design` (auto-detects epic-level mode) to create epic-specific test plan (e.g., `test-design-epic-1.md`, `test-design-epic-2.md`) with compliance-focused risk assessment.
6. **Per-Story (Phase 4):** For each story, TEA uses `*atdd`, `*automate`, `*test-review`, and `*trace`; Dev teams iterate on the findings.
7. **Release Gate:** TEA re-checks coverage, performs final quality audit with `*test-review`, and logs the final gate decision via `*trace` Phase 2, archiving artifacts for compliance.

</details>

## Command Catalog

<details>
<summary><strong>Optional Playwright MCP Enhancements</strong></summary>

**Two Playwright MCP servers** (actively maintained, continuously updated):

- `playwright` - Browser automation (`npx @playwright/mcp@latest`)
- `playwright-test` - Test runner with failure analysis (`npx playwright run-test-mcp-server`)

**How MCP Enhances TEA Workflows**:

MCP provides additional capabilities on top of TEA's default AI-based approach:

1. `*test-design`:
   - Default: Analysis + documentation
   - **+ MCP**: Interactive UI discovery with `browser_navigate`, `browser_click`, `browser_snapshot`, behavior observation

   Benefit: Discover actual functionality, edge cases, undocumented features

2. `*atdd`, `*automate`:
   - Default: Infers selectors and interactions from requirements and knowledge fragments
   - **+ MCP**: Generates tests **then** verifies with `generator_setup_page`, `browser_*` tools, validates against live app

   Benefit: Accurate selectors from real DOM, verified behavior, refined test code

3. `*automate`:
   - Default: Pattern-based fixes from error messages + knowledge fragments
   - **+ MCP**: Pattern fixes **enhanced with** `browser_snapshot`, `browser_console_messages`, `browser_network_requests`, `browser_generate_locator`

   Benefit: Visual failure context, live DOM inspection, root cause discovery

**Config example**:

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "playwright": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["@playwright/mcp@latest"]
    },
    "playwright-test": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["playwright", "run-test-mcp-server"]
    }
  }
}
```

**To disable**: Set `tea_use_mcp_enhancements: false` in `.bmad/bmm/config.yaml` OR remove MCPs from IDE config.

</details>

<br></br>

| Command        | Workflow README                                   | Primary Outputs                                                                               | Notes                                                | With Playwright MCP Enhancements                                                                             |
| -------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| `*framework`   | [📖](../workflows/testarch/framework/README.md)   | Playwright/Cypress scaffold, `.env.example`, `.nvmrc`, sample specs                           | Use when no production-ready harness exists          | -                                                                                                            |
| `*ci`          | [📖](../workflows/testarch/ci/README.md)          | CI workflow, selective test scripts, secrets checklist                                        | Platform-aware (GitHub Actions default)              | -                                                                                                            |
| `*test-design` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/test-design/README.md) | Combined risk assessment, mitigation plan, and coverage strategy                              | Risk scoring + optional exploratory mode             | **+ Exploratory**: Interactive UI discovery with browser automation (uncover actual functionality)           |
| `*atdd`        | [📖](../workflows/testarch/atdd/README.md)        | Failing acceptance tests + implementation checklist                                           | TDD red phase + optional recording mode              | **+ Recording**: AI generation verified with live browser (accurate selectors from real DOM)                 |
| `*automate`    | [📖](../workflows/testarch/automate/README.md)    | Prioritized specs, fixtures, README/script updates, DoD summary                               | Optional healing/recording, avoid duplicate coverage | **+ Healing**: Pattern fixes enhanced with visual debugging + **+ Recording**: AI verified with live browser |
| `*test-review` | [📖](../workflows/testarch/test-review/README.md) | Test quality review report with 0-100 score, violations, fixes                                | Reviews tests against knowledge base patterns        | -                                                                                                            |
| `*nfr-assess`  | [📖](../workflows/testarch/nfr-assess/README.md)  | NFR assessment report with actions                                                            | Focus on security/performance/reliability            | -                                                                                                            |
| `*trace`       | [📖](../workflows/testarch/trace/README.md)       | Phase 1: Coverage matrix, recommendations. Phase 2: Gate decision (PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL/WAIVED) | Two-phase workflow: traceability + gate decision     | -                                                                                                            |

**📖** = Click to view detailed workflow documentation