---

name: regression-test-plan description: "Design and prioritize a regression test suite so changes don't break what worked. Use when asked to plan regression testing, build a regression suite, decide what to re-test after a change, or trim a bloated regression pack. Produces a risk-based regression plan — what to re-test and why, prioritised tiers (smoke → full), automation candidates, and a run strategy per release — so coverage matches risk and the suite stays fast."

Regression Test Plan Skill

Regression testing protects what already works — but re-running everything every time is slow and wasteful, and testing too little ships breakage. The answer is risk-based: re-test what changed, what it touches, and what hurts most if it breaks. This skill builds that prioritised plan and a run strategy, so coverage tracks risk and the suite doesn't balloon.

Working from a brief

Given "we're shipping a checkout change, what should we regression-test?", produce the plan anyway — infer the impacted areas and a sensible prioritisation, labelling assumptions. Tie scope to change-impact and risk. Never hand back a question instead of a plan.

Required Inputs

Ask for these only if they aren't already provided (else infer and label):

• The change — what's being released/modified, and what it touches (and integrates with).
• Critical paths — the flows that must never break (revenue, auth, data integrity).
• Existing coverage — current regression cases/automation, if any, and how long a full run takes.
• Constraints — time/resources per release, and manual vs. automated capacity.

Output Format

Regression Plan: [release/change]

1. Impact analysis — what changed, the areas directly and indirectly affected, and the high-risk zones (shared components, recent bugs, complex logic).

2. Prioritised scope — what to re-test, in tiers:

Tier	When to run	Scope	Why
Smoke / sanity	every build	critical paths only (login, checkout, save)	fast fail
Targeted	this change	the changed area + its direct dependencies	change-impact
Full regression	major release / risky change	broad core coverage	safety net

3. What to skip (and the risk) — explicitly de-scope low-risk, unchanged areas, and name the residual risk.

4. Automation candidates — which cases are stable, high-value, and repetitive enough to automate first (and which to keep manual).

5. Run strategy — when each tier runs (per-commit / per-release), order (critical first), and the entry/exit criteria for sign-off.

Quality Checks

• Scope is driven by change-impact and risk, not "run everything" or "run the same list every time"
• Critical paths are always covered (a fast smoke tier)
• De-scoped areas are explicit, with the residual risk named
• Automation candidates are prioritised by stability and value
• A run strategy ties each tier to when it runs and the sign-off criteria
• The suite stays proportionate to the time/risk — not bloated

Anti-Patterns

• Do not "re-run everything" by default — it's slow and trains teams to skip it
• Do not test only the changed file — cover its dependencies and shared components
• Do not silently drop coverage — when you de-scope, state the risk
• Do not automate flaky or rarely-run cases first — start with stable, high-value ones
• Do not let the suite grow unbounded — prune and tier it as the product changes

Based On

Risk-based regression practice — change-impact analysis, tiered smoke/targeted/full suites, automation prioritisation, and release-fit run strategy.

Example Trigger Phrases

• "Plan regression testing."
• "Build a regression suite."
• "Decide what to re-test after a change."
• "Trim a bloated regression pack."