describe('UserService', () => {
  it('should create user with valid data', async () => {
    // Arrange
    const userData = { email: 'test@example.com', name: 'Test User' };

    // Act
    const result = await userService.createUser(userData);

    // Assert
    expect(result).toHaveProperty('id');
    expect(result.email).toBe(userData.email);
  });
});

project/
├── src/
│   └── components/
│       └── User.jsx
├── tests/
│   ├── unit/
│   │   └── User.test.jsx
│   ├── integration/
│   │   └── UserAPI.test.js
│   └── e2e/
│       └── user-flow.spec.js
├── jest.config.js
└── playwright.config.js

User task → Is it static HTML?
    ├─ Yes → Read HTML file directly to identify selectors
    │         ├─ Success → Write Playwright script using selectors
    │         └─ Fails/Incomplete → Treat as dynamic (below)
    │
    └─ No (dynamic webapp) → Is the server already running?
        ├─ No → Run: python scripts/with_server.py --help
        │        Then use the helper + write simplified Playwright script
        │
        └─ Yes → Reconnaissance-then-action:
            1. Navigate and wait for networkidle
            2. Take screenshot or inspect DOM
            3. Identify selectors from rendered state
            4. Execute actions with discovered selectors

from playwright.sync_api import sync_playwright

with sync_playwright() as p:
    browser = p.chromium.launch(headless=True)
    page = browser.new_page()
    page.goto('http://localhost:5173')
    page.wait_for_load_state('networkidle')  # CRITICAL: Wait for JS to execute
    # ... your automation logic
    browser.close()

TDD is a DESIGN technique, not a testing technique.

The cycle never changes: RED → GREEN → REFACTOR → Repeat

Writing tests first forces you to think about:
- What behavior do I need?
- How will I know it works?
- What's the simplest implementation?

This produces better-designed, more maintainable code.