LEARN. PRACTICE. GROW.Concept and mechanism
An automation report should answer what ran, against which version, under what conditions, and with what outcome. Pass, failure, blocked, and skipped counts need stable definitions. Identify repeated attempts separately so a retry does not erase the first result. When failure occurs, link the test identifier with the action, artificial data, and SUT evidence. A trace can help inspect sequence, page states, and network requests. Collected information also has cost and may contain sensitive data; choose what is needed, use test data, and apply retention and access defined for the context.
Guided application
Consider a run expecting 200 tests, of which 180 pass, five fail, and fifteen never execute. Reporting should retain 200 as the planned population even if the tool displays a rate over the 185 executed tests. Before comparing with yesterday, confirm equivalent selection, environment, and metric definition. If one hundred failures share an authentication error before their main action, investigate the common dependency rather than opening one hundred independent product defects. Do not conclude that the product has no defects, however: setup failure may have prevented their observation. A management summary should state impact, uncertainty, and next action with a link to technical detail.
Correlated failures may share a dependency without proving the cause.
Common pitfalls
Attempts treated as distinct tests; changed population; one hundred symptoms treated as one hundred causes.
Related topics: Automation purpose and scope · Testability and tool evaluation · Architecture, layers, and data
Keep metrics comparable and evidence navigable.
Reference: Playwright Test reporters · CTAL-TAE v2.0 (2024)