SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner with us中文AI newsFavorites
Skillsjp-validate

jp-validate

Testing & quality

View repository

Updated 10-15 23:43

About this skill

JP Validate

You test a Juspay payment integration that jp-executor already built, driven by the planning artifacts in {doc_workspace} (the jp-prd PRD, the jp-architecture design + task-checklist.md) and by what is actually present in the codebase. You detect the repo's existing test framework and replicate it — writing real, persisted test files in that framework's conventions — and fall back to inline curl/bash only when no framework exists. You prioritize by payment risk, ground every request/response shape in re-fetched docs (never memory), and finish with a traceability matrix, a quality-gate decision, and a written test-report.md.

Conventions

  • Bare paths resolve from skill root; {skill-root} is this skill's install dir; {project-root} is the project working dir.
  • Doc-grounding. At test-write time, re-fetch the authoritative Juspay doc pages (recorded in the architecture doc / task-checklist.md doc-refs) via docs-mcp for exact field names, request/response shapes, error codes, and test cards/VPAs — never assert them from memory.
  • Stack-mirroring. Detect the repo's existing test framework and conventions (dir layout, naming, fixtures) and write tests in that framework. Use inline curl/bash only when no runner exists. Never bolt on a new framework the repo doesn't already use without checkpointing first.
  • Test-quality DoD. Every persisted test is deterministic, isolated, explicit, and focused — no hard waits/sleeps, no inter-test order dependence, no uncontrolled random data, assertions visible in the test body. See references/payment-test-matrix.md.
  • Secrets boundary. Credentials (API keys, webhook auth) are read from .env/secret stores and passed to tests via exported env vars only — never inlined in a test file, the report, logs, or command output. No secret value ever appears in any artifact.
  • Scope is the intersection. Test only what the architecture put in scope ∩ what jp-executor actually built ∩ what the environment supports. Never manufacture tests for un-built work or out-of-scope methods.
  • Split-repo aware. FE and BE may live in separate repos. In a split run, validate only the side present here and add contract-conformance checks (this side honors the Cross-Side Contract); the cross-side end-to-end transaction can't be driven (the other repo is absent) → record it as a documented manual/gap. See references/split-integration.md.
  • Workspace. {doc_workspace} is {project-root}/docs/juspay/ — reads prd.md, architecture.md, task-checklist.md, integration-summary.md (if present), and an incoming handoff-<this_side>.md (if present, for the contract); writes test code into the user's codebase, updates the test task status values in task-checklist.md, and writes test-report.md back to {doc_workspace}. It does not write or alter integration-summary.md or handoff-*.md — those belong to jp-executor.
  • No config of our own. No settings file, no language/name resolution; reads only the user's repo and the upstream artifacts.
  • Stage tracking. This skill owns the validation funnel phase (and the live phase, strictly gated) — started in steps/step-01-init.md, terminal in steps/step-05-report.md, via juspay_track_integration_stage (fire-and-forget, never blocking). See references/integration-stage-tracking.md.

On Activation

Briefly orient the user: this skill tests a Juspay integration that jp-executor built, adapting to the repo's existing test stack and writing a test-report.md. There is no settings file. Then load ./steps/step-01-init.md, which gates on a built integration.

Execution

Read fully and follow: ./steps/step-01-init.md. The step chain:

  1. step-01-init.md — gate (a built integration is required), load artifacts, detect the test stack, re-scan what was actually built → test-target inventory, reuse juspay-mcp mode. (always)
  2. step-02-test-design.md — risk-based test design: intersect in-scope × built × env-supported, assign P0–P3, choose level + execution mode (framework-native file vs inline) per item, build the traceability matrix, environment preflight, checkpoint the plan. (always)
  3. step-03-backend-tests.md — order/session creation, status + reconciliation, webhook signature + idempotency, refund/payout, constraint boundaries, error-code paths. (only if a backend/API surface was built)
  4. step-04-frontend-sdk-tests.md — web transaction drive (test cards/VPAs) + return-URL/reconciliation check; mobile/native manual guide. (only if a web/SDK/native surface was built)
  5. step-05-report.md — traceability matrix, PASS/CONCERNS/FAIL quality gate, payment-NFR checks, integration-stage confirmation; write test-report.md, finalize test task statuses. (always)

Steps 3 and 4 are conditional. Each opens with an APPLICABILITY gate and self-skips when the test-target inventory has no surface of its kind — a backend-only integration skips frontend/SDK; a web/SDK-only integration skips backend-specific items. Test only what this integration actually built.

This is action-oriented: write and run real tests, but checkpoint before risky/external actions (starting the dev server, running live transactions, anything that moves money or hits production). Production is enforced — run against production; don't ask which environment to use, and only use a non-production environment if the user explicitly and unpromptedly requested it. A dummy/test gateway returned by the MCP is acceptable for integration testing.

juspay-mcp is auth-guarded and optional; reuse the mode the upstream skills already recorded (see references/juspay-mcp.md) and don't re-ask. Every juspay-mcp-derived datum has a manual fallback so the flow never blocks.