I built a Chrome extension that turns bug reproductions into Playwright test drafts

Orhan Eren Kara — Sat, 03 Oct 2026 19:25:45 +0000

A bug report often says “this button broke,” but the steps that caused it get lost. I built QA Bug → Regression Test to capture one manual bug reproduction and turn it into two editable starting points: a Markdown bug report and a Playwright TypeScript regression-test draft.

The workflow is straightforward:

Open a web page and start a bug session from the Chrome side panel. The extension requests access to that site when recording begins.
Reproduce the issue. The recorder captures supported clicks, form input, selections, and navigation. You can add visible-text or visible-element assertions, a bug title, expected and actual results, and one optional screenshot.
Stop the session, review what was captured, then generate and download the report and test draft.

The goal is to reduce the work between finding a bug and writing down enough detail for someone else to reproduce it. The generated test is a draft, not a passing test guarantee: check its locators, warnings, skipped steps, and assertions, replace any test-data placeholders, and run it in your own Playwright project. The recorder currently focuses on the initial site's main frame; cross-origin pages and some popup or new-tab flows can need manual work.

Sessions are stored locally in Chrome. There is no account or cloud sync in this version. Recognized sensitive form values and supported URL query/hash values receive rule-based redaction, but detection is not exhaustive. Page text, URL paths, and screenshot pixels can still contain private information, so review every output before sharing it. The optional feedback form sends only the message and optional reply email you choose to submit; it does not attach your recording or screenshot.

The interface and bug reports support English and Turkish. The generated Playwright code uses TypeScript.

Try it: QA Bug → Regression Test on the Chrome Web Store

If you do manual QA or write Playwright tests, I'd be interested to hear which part of the bug-to-test handoff costs you the most time.

I built MindContext to keep research notes connected to their sources

Orhan Eren Kara — Sat, 03 Oct 2026 18:44:11 +0000

When I research a topic, I usually end up with too many tabs, a separate notes document, and a chat window. The frustrating part is not collecting information. It is remembering where a quote came from and which of my notes belonged to that source.

I built MindContext, a Chrome side panel for that workflow. It keeps a note attached to the page URL, lets me save selected text through the right-click menu, and groups related pages into research projects. When I want to discuss the material with ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini, it prepares the page context, my notes, and saved quotes in one place. I can review the prompt before sending it.

A small example

Suppose I am comparing three articles about a library or technical approach. I can:

Save the useful passages from each article.
Add my own questions and observations next to each source.
Group the pages in one research project.
Bring the collected context into an AI chat for comparison.

The notes and quotes are stored locally in Chrome. There is no account required to use the extension. The optional feedback form sends only the answers the user chooses to submit to the developer through Formspree.

This is an early version. It currently works in Chrome, and notes are local to the browser profile; there is no cross-device sync. I would rather learn whether the core workflow is useful before adding more features.

If you research across many tabs, I would appreciate your take: Where does your current note-taking workflow break down? Would attaching notes to individual pages help, or would you organize them differently?

Try MindContext on the Chrome Web Store

DEV Community: Orhan Eren Kara

I built a Chrome extension that turns bug reproductions into Playwright test drafts

I built MindContext to keep research notes connected to their sources

A small example