fix▌
alirezarezvani/claude-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Diagnose and fix a Playwright test that fails or passes intermittently using a systematic taxonomy.
Fix Failing or Flaky Tests
Diagnose and fix a Playwright test that fails or passes intermittently using a systematic taxonomy.
Input
$ARGUMENTS contains:
- A test file path:
e2e/login.spec.ts - A test name: ""should redirect after login"`
- A description:
"the checkout test fails in CI but passes locally"
Steps
1. Reproduce the Failure
Run the test to capture the error:
npx playwright test <file> --reporter=list
If the test passes, it's likely flaky. Run burn-in:
npx playwright test <file> --repeat-each=10 --reporter=list
If it still passes, try with parallel workers:
npx playwright test --fully-parallel --workers=4 --repeat-each=5
2. Capture Trace
Run with full tracing:
npx playwright test <file> --trace=on --retries=0
Read the trace output. Use /debug to analyze trace files if available.
3. Categorize the Failure
Load flaky-taxonomy.md from this skill directory.
Every failing test falls into one of four categories:
| Category | Symptom | Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|
| Timing/Async | Fails intermittently everywhere | --repeat-each=20 reproduces locally |
| Test Isolation | Fails in suite, passes alone | --workers=1 --grep "test name" passes |
| Environment | Fails in CI, passes locally | Compare CI vs local screenshots/traces |
| Infrastructure | Random, no pattern | Error references browser internals |
4. Apply Targeted Fix
Timing/Async:
- Replace
waitForTimeout()with web-first assertions - Add
awaitto missing Playwright calls - Wait for specific network responses before asserting
- Use
toBeVisible()before interacting with elements
Test Isolation:
- Remove shared mutable state between tests
- Create test data per-test via API or fixtures
- Use unique identifiers (timestamps, random strings) for test data
- Check for database state leaks
Environment:
- Match viewport sizes between local and CI
- Account for font rendering differences in screenshots
- Use
dockerlocally to match CI environment - Check for timezone-dependent assertions
Infrastructure:
- Increase timeout for slow CI runners
- Add retries in CI config (
retries: 2) - Check for browser OOM (reduce parallel workers)
- Ensure browser dependencies are installed
5. Verify the Fix
Run the test 10 times to confirm stability:
npx playwright test <file> --repeat-each=10 --reporter=list
All 10 must pass. If any fail, go back to step 3.
6. Prevent Recurrence
Suggest:
- Add to CI with
retries: 2if not already - Enable
trace: 'on-first-retry'in config - Add the fix pattern to project's test conventions doc
Output
- Root cause category and specific issue
- The fix applied (with diff)
- Verification result (10/10 passes)
- Prevention recommendation
How to use fix on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add fix
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches fix from GitHub repository alirezarezvani/claude-skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate fix. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /fix) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.8★★★★★55 reviews- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Dec 24, 2024
fix has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Noor Gupta· Dec 24, 2024
fix has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Jin Ramirez· Dec 16, 2024
fix fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Dev Kapoor· Dec 12, 2024
fix is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Rahul Santra· Nov 15, 2024
fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Anaya Torres· Nov 15, 2024
fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Arya Mehta· Nov 7, 2024
We added fix from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Noor Kapoor· Nov 3, 2024
Keeps context tight: fix is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Arya Jain· Oct 26, 2024
fix reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Arya Ramirez· Oct 22, 2024
I recommend fix for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 55