TestDino: uses, strengths, and limitations

In plain words

When Playwright finishes a run it produces a report — but that report lives and dies with one run, on one machine. TestDino collects those runs in one place over time, so you can ask questions a single report cannot answer: is this test getting slower, has it failed before, did this start after Tuesday's release?

Think of it as the difference between a receipt and a bank statement. Both are accurate; only one shows you a pattern.

What using it looks like

1. Keep running Playwright exactly as you already do.
2. Add an upload step to your CI job so results and evidence are sent after each run.
3. Open a failed run and go straight to its trace, screenshot or video instead of downloading an artifact.
4. Look across runs to see which failures repeat and which are one-offs.
5. Use that history to decide what to fix first.

The value shows up once you have a few weeks of history. Before that, a local HTML report tells you nearly as much.

What to watch out for

• It is built around Playwright. If your suite is Selenium or Cypress, this is not your tool.
• Uploading traces and videos means test evidence leaves your CI. Check what is in them — screenshots of a test environment can still contain data you would rather not send.
• Analytics tell you which tests are unreliable. They do not fix them. Someone still has to.
• If your suite is small and stable, a static report may genuinely be enough.

Common questions