Skip to main content

Testing Guides for UI Patterns

Short answer

Forms, search, i18n, websockets, grids, GDPR, non-functional—cross-cutting UI pattern testing. Each guide includes complexity maps, fixture patterns, probe-first Assert, and page-scoped FAQs—wired to TestChimp QA workflow where it helps maintenance and requirement coverage.

Guides in this section

GuideWhat you'll learn
Form Validation and Error StatesValidation must be tested server-side—client-only tests miss API bypass
Search, Filters, and Faceted NavigationFilter combinations explode—prioritize by prod usage
Infinite Scroll and PaginationScroll tests flake on timing—assert item count monotonic
Drag-and-Drop and Sortable ListsPrefer probe on resulting order over pixel-perfect drag
Rich Text and WYSIWYG EditorsAssert saved HTML via probe—not editor DOM alone
Dates, Timezones, and SchedulingWall-clock tests flake—use clock
Localization and i18n FlowsMissing keys and RTL overflow are common ship blockers
WebSockets and Live UI UpdatesLive UI tests need wait for message or poll probe
Video and Audio Player ControlsAutoplay policies differ by browser—test controls not autoplay in CI
Data Grids, Sorting, and Bulk ActionsVirtual scroll hides rows—assert via API or aria row count
Calendar Booking and SchedulingDouble-booking is the critical negative path
GDPR Export, Delete, and Consent FlowsPrivacy bugs are regulatory incidents
Catch Non-Functional Bugs in E2E (UX, Performance, Accessibility)Beyond functional asserts—ExploreChimp on SmartTest paths for latency, confusing errors, accessibility gaps, and visual regressions functional E2E misses
Mobile Web and Responsive CheckoutMobile viewport E2E—touch targets, sticky CTAs, Apple Pay/Google Pay, and probe Assert—bridge to Mobilewright for native apps

How TestChimp applies to these guides

These guides are scenario playbooks—Arrange/Act/Assert patterns, fixture discipline, probe Assert—not product feature lists. When you wire them into your repo, TestChimp adds:

LayerWhat it does
Test planning as codeMarkdown scenarios in Git consolidate business rules agents read on every PR (test planning)
SmartTests + AI stepsPlaywright you own; ai.act / ai.verify for volatile UI without abandoning probes (SmartTests)
Requirement traceability// @Scenario: links connect specs to plan rows—critical in complex products with many dimension combos (traceability)
Per-PR QA workflow/testchimp test in Claude or Cursor with the TestChimp skill—not a web recorder (QA on Autopilot)
ExploreChimpNon-functional bug capture on SmartTest paths—latency, UX confusion, accessibility gaps most suites miss (explorations)
Post-deploy evolve/testchimp evolve closes plan and production gaps; TrueCoverage is one signal among explore findings and requirement holes

Why record-replay and no-code tools fall short

Browser recorders and web-based no-code suites optimize click capture. They struggle with per-run seed data, probe Assert on authoritative state, requirement matrices in Git, and non-functional regressions on real user paths. TestChimp contrasts that approach: orchestrated QA where Claude (upskilled with the TestChimp skill) maintains SmartTests against markdown plans—see record-replay vs TestChimp.

Other guide sections

Frequently asked questions

Forms vs search vs i18n—which first?

Form validation for data-entry risk; search/filters for catalog revenue; i18n before global launch—non-functional guide after functional probes exist.

When should I run ExploreChimp on pattern flows?

After SmartTests cover the path functionally—ExploreChimp finds UX, a11y, and layout issues probes ignore.

Are pattern guides enough for compliance?

GDPR and audit guides cover regulatory flows; pair with vertical compliance guides for industry specifics.