Automated UI Testing

The problem

UI bugs are the ones users hit first: a button that renders but isn't wired to its handler, a form that submits twice, a modal that won't close, a layout that breaks on a real screen, a flow that dead-ends. Component tests pass, the design looks right in review, and the assembled interface is still broken in ways nobody checked.

Why the usual approach falls short

• Component tests don't test the assembled UI. They check pieces in isolation, not the whole screen wired to real data and real navigation.
• Scripted UI tests are brittle. They break on markup changes that didn't affect what the user sees or does.
• Manual UI checks are inconsistent and don't scale to every release.

How Manta fits

Manta drives your actual running interface — clicking real buttons, filling real forms, moving through real flows — and reports what's broken: dead clicks, failed submissions, flows that don't complete, and visual regressions caught from the screenshots it takes along the way. Because it identifies elements by what they do rather than by a selector, a restyled component or restructured DOM doesn't break coverage.

For specific UI flows that must always work, describe them in plain English and Manta checks them every run.

This sits on top of component testing, not instead of it — keep React Testing Library, Storybook, and the rest for isolated component behaviour. See how to test a React app end to end for the layered picture.

What your first run looks like

1. Point Manta at the running app with a test account.
2. Watch it exercise the interface; findings appear as it goes.
3. Review the bug list — each UI issue has a screenshot and reproduction steps.

Where it fits

Component tests for pieces, Manta for the assembled interface, a small scripted set for exact visual or behavioural assertions. The end-to-end testing guide covers the wider strategy.