Show HN: Auto-Browse – AI That Writes Automation Tests in Just One Line of Code(typescript.docs.auto-browse.com)

3 pointsby gooruel año pasado4 comments

typescript.docs.auto-browse.com

Show HN: Auto-Browse – AI That Writes Automation Tests in Just One Line of Code

https://typescript.docs.auto-browse.com/introduction

Hey HN,

I’ve built Auto-Browse, an AI-powered agent that eliminates the need to write step definitions manually. Instead of mapping test steps to code, Auto-Browse directly executes BDD tests written in natural language with just one simple handler:

When(/^(.*)$/, async ({ page }, action: string) => { await auto(action, { page }); }); That’s it. No more writing boilerplate step definitions. No need for automation engineers to manually script test logic. Just describe your test steps in plain English, and the AI handles execution.

Why this is a game-changer:

No step definitions needed – write tests directly in natural language.

Works with BDD frameworks like Cucumber and Playwright.

Reduces test automation setup time drastically.

Example test case:

Given user is on the login page When user enters "admin" in the username field And user enters "password" in the password field Then user should see the dashboard See it in action: https://youtu.be/VxJg3RRShoY Docs: https://typescript.docs.auto-browse.com/usage/bdd-mode Website: https://www.auto-browse.com NPM: npm install @auto-browse/auto-browse

Would love to hear your thoughts—does this approach resonate with you?

2 comments

Klaster_1el año pasado

This is the direction I'd love UI automation to move towards, congrats on bringing it closer. Gonna try and see how it works for me. I have a couple of questions:

1. How's reproducibility of actions, is it flaky?

2. How does it perform under adversarial conditions, such as slow network and high CPU load? With current crop of frameworks, you have to write tests defensively.

3. Any plans for visual regression integration? I'd love to have a smart VR tool that doesn't fail because a Linux machine CI renders fonts differently than Windows. None of the existing image comparison libraries are robust enough.

gooruel año pasado

Thanks for reading and sharing your inputs.

1. To answer this, I will try to record a video this week. It's not a short answer because, if you’ve heard of Anthropic's computer-use, browser-use, or OpenAI's operator, this takes a slightly improved approach. It was demonstrated by Playwright MCP, which leverages the Accessibility Tree. In my testing, this worked well for a very clunky web app with many Shadow DOMs and iframes.

2. There is a built-in mechanism to deal with this. Once I hear more feedback on its performance, I can make improvements.

3. Right now, it does not use vision. The reason I didn't add vision in v1 is that I wanted to run tests with lower token costs and prove it works equally well without vision. I plan to add vision as an option for those who don’t mind the token cost.

*Summary*: This is a lightweight library, making it easy to adjust and improve.

Spacemolteel año pasado

This is cool, but there is no way I would want to have our test suite rely on LLM's for every single run. It would however be really cool to use this during test recording, to lower the barrier for users, among other things.

gooruel año pasado

I really like that thought. I was initially working towards that like to generate just the code. The issue which i found was, when our app changes, we will again have to redo the code generation. And since it is code, we will still need someone to review it. I am not against all this. But my first goal was to prove that the job of Automation Tester is taken over by AI now. Next, as i get more feedback and response, i will try if it can start generating code along. Really appreciate the feedback.