Skip to content

test: migrate card tests to appium#33407

Open
pnarayanaswamy wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
migrate-card
Open

test: migrate card tests to appium#33407
pnarayanaswamy wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
migrate-card

Conversation

@pnarayanaswamy

@pnarayanaswamy pnarayanaswamy commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Migrated card test from detox to appium

Changelog

CHANGELOG entry:

Related issues

Fixes: https://consensyssoftware.atlassian.net/browse/MMQA-1989

Manual testing steps

NA

Screenshots/Recordings

NA

Before

NA

After

NA

Pre-merge author checklist

Performance checks (if applicable)

  • I've tested on Android
    • Ideally on a mid-range device; emulator is acceptable
  • I've tested with a power user scenario
    • Use these power-user SRPs to import wallets with many accounts and tokens
  • I've instrumented key operations with Sentry traces for production performance metrics

For performance guidelines and tooling, see the Performance Guide.

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

  • I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
  • I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

Note

Low Risk
Test-only addition with no production code changes; risk is limited to CI/runtime for the new Appium suite.

Overview
Adds tests/smoke-appium/card/card-home-add-funds.spec.ts, an Appium/Playwright smoke test that mirrors the existing Jest CardHome - Add Funds flow.

The new spec uses the appiumTest harness, loginToAppPlaywright, passes currentDeviceDetails into withFixtures, and wires the same Linea/USDC fixtures, cardholder mocks, and cardHomeAddFundsExpectations analytics. After login it opens Card from the wallet navbar, taps Add funds, and asserts the deposit and swap options on the bottom sheet are visible.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 2f20ebe. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

@metamask-ci metamask-ci Bot added the team-qa QA team label Jul 16, 2026
@metamask-ci

metamask-ci Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR template — items to address before "Ready for review"

Warnings — informational, address before merging:

  • Pre-merge author checklist has unchecked items (e.g. "I've tested on Android"). Every box must be consciously checked — see docs/readme/ready-for-review.md.

See docs/readme/ready-for-review.md for the full Definition of Ready for Review.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🔍 Smart E2E Test Selection

  • Selected E2E tags: SmokeMoney
  • Selected Performance tags: None (no tests recommended)
  • Risk Level: medium
  • AI Confidence: 95%
click to see 🤖 AI reasoning details

E2E Test Selection:
Hard rule (test-spec-tag-extraction): Spec files changed directly. Running their associated tags: SmokeMoney

Performance Test Selection:
No app source code was changed — only a new smoke-appium test spec was added. There is no performance-sensitive code path modified that would warrant running performance tests.

View GitHub Actions results

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the risk:low AI analysis: low risk label Jul 16, 2026
@pnarayanaswamy pnarayanaswamy added the no-changelog no-changelog Indicates no external facing user changes, therefore no changelog documentation needed label Jul 16, 2026
@pnarayanaswamy pnarayanaswamy enabled auto-merge July 16, 2026 11:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

no-changelog no-changelog Indicates no external facing user changes, therefore no changelog documentation needed risk:low AI analysis: low risk size-S team-qa QA team

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants