Update Multistep check overview page#1271
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
Same comment here @guolau - the image at the top is jarring because of the size and how much it takes up in the window. Should have to scroll slightly, or just have more text at the top. |
|
Moved image further down page @Dgiordano33 I might just remove the intro image from all the check overview pages, they're all the same and I'm not sure how much they add. |
|
|
||
| Monitoring your API user flows instead of individual endpoints gives confidence that your product as a whole works as intended and that the expected interactions between API calls are functional. | ||
|
|
||
|  |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@guolau the check name in this screenshot can be confusing for users as it references multiple Checkly construct. Let's have these reference something not Checkly related, i.e. a realistic (sounding) API endpoint or its related feature.
|
|
||
| Multistep checks are powered by `@playwright/test`'s [API Testing](https://playwright.dev/docs/api-testing) mode. Meaning you get all of the power of our typical API checks in the form of a programmable `@playwright/test` check. | ||
|
|
||
| > Multistep checks are only supported on runtime 2023.09 or later. See [Runtimes](/docs/runtimes/) for more details. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@guolau on the part just following, where it is said that
The following code is a valid Multistep check
Can we adjust this? What is shown is not a multistep check, but rather the PWT spec it is built on. I think it's important to make this clearer (also in the "Breaking down a multistep check" section) as right after we actually assume that distinction when talking about "Creating multistep checks"
| > If the script fails, your check fails. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Structuring a Multistep check | ||
| #### Structuring a Multistep check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@guolau having this as h4 doesn't feel right, but this will be fixed when we go back and make the above h3s in the "Creating a Multistep check" section just a bullet point list or similar, as you already suggested.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added an action item to revisit this in the facelift wrap up task on the Support Board, so we don't lose it
3 participants
Affected Components
Pre-Requisites
npm run lint)Notes for the Reviewer
Updated the Multistep check overview page according to the check overview page facelift proposal.
Includes minor changes to /docs/monitoring/check-results/#multistep-check-results.