Ever reproduced a bug, documented the steps, and then had to write the same steps all over again as an automated regression test?
That repetitive workflow is what inspired me to build QA Bug, a Chrome extension designed to turn browser-based bug reproductions into Playwright test drafts.
🛠️ How it works
Reproduce the bug — Interact with the website as you normally would.
Capture the steps — Record browser actions and relevant interactions.
Add assertions — Define what the test should verify.
Generate a Playwright test draft — Turn the recorded session into a .spec.ts file that you can review, edit, and adapt to your project.
The goal isn't to replace QA engineers or magically generate perfect tests. It's to reduce repetitive work between reproducing a bug and creating a starting point for regression automation.
I'm building this as a practical tool for QA engineers and developers who want to make browser testing less repetitive.
💬 I'd like your feedback
Would you use a tool that converts bug reproduction sessions into Playwright test drafts?
What would you need before trusting the generated tests in a real project?
Which part of your bug-to-regression workflow takes the most time?
I'm interested in honest feedback from people who work with manual testing, Playwright, and test automation.
🔧 I'd rather build something QA engineers actually need than add features nobody uses.
Chrome Web Store:
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/qa-bug-→-regression-test/khoelciicbkdeieibchdndccdncpelbg?authuser=1&hl=tr