Browser extension project brief: a worked example and template

Start with one user action

A browser extension project brief gives a developer a concrete workflow to discuss. Start with who will use the extension, what they do today and the action you want to change. Then describe the result you would accept, including what should happen when access or a dependency fails.

Separate requirements from decisions still to be made. An unknown browser version or integration detail can stay open if someone is responsible for resolving it. Calling it agreed too early makes the eventual scope harder to check.

The filled example shows one proposed workflow. The blank template is available below to select and copy. You can also ask about development with a short question; completing the template is optional.

Filled project brief: capture a staging issue

This is a hypothetical request written for this guide. It describes a proposed extension for a QA team, not a client project, an implemented feature or an offer with a fixed price or delivery date. The behavior below would need review and agreement before work starts.

Goal and the user’s task

Our QA testers report defects while checking a staging website. A tester should be able to open an extension, prepare an issue with the relevant page path, enter a title and reproduction steps, review the contents and send it to our team’s issue tracker.

We want each accepted report to contain the context another tester needs to reproduce the issue. The acceptance checks below establish the requested behavior. Whether the team finds it useful in daily work would need a separate trial.

What exists today

The team currently copies the page address and writes the report manually in the tracker. There is no extension codebase. We have a staging site, a tracker test project and a QA lead who can provide dummy pages and sample reports.

The first scope is one staging site and one tracker project. Screenshots, production-site access and background collection are outside this proposed first scope. We would discuss additional workflows separately.

Browsers and operating constraints

We request Chrome and Microsoft Edge on the team’s Windows devices. The QA lead must record the actual browser versions and any managed-device restrictions before the developer confirms coverage and checks the package. Firefox is outside this example’s first scope.

The extension should act when a tester opens it and chooses to prepare a report. If the current page is outside the agreed staging site, it should explain that the page is outside scope and leave the tracker unchanged. Browser access and the exact implementation remain items for technical review.

Data and access

The proposed report contains the staging page’s origin and path, a title and reproduction steps entered by the tester, plus browser details agreed for the test. Query strings and page contents are excluded from automatic capture. The tester reviews and can edit the report before sending it.

The QA lead supplies dummy data for development and acceptance. The developer and tracker administrator must agree authentication, necessary access and storage before implementation. Who can view drafts and how drafts are removed remain open. The initial enquiry should describe these needs; passwords, tokens and real customer records should stay out of it.

Integration and failure behavior

The destination is the team’s existing issue tracker, in a dedicated test project during acceptance. The tracker administrator owns access to that project and must provide the relevant interface documentation for review.

A successful send should show the created issue’s identifier and a link the tester can open. A refused request should leave the entered report available for correction. If the response is lost and creation is uncertain, the interface should say the outcome is unknown and direct the tester to check the tracker before another attempt. How to identify an uncertain attempt is an open integration decision.

Checks that would establish the requested result

Run these checks with the agreed package, browser versions, dummy page and test tracker project. Keep the actual result beside each expected result; until performed, each check is unverified.

Acceptance, handover and release roles

The developer would provide the agreed package, build instructions and check results. The QA lead would reproduce the checks and record accepted items and unresolved failures. The tracker administrator would confirm the test access and the production integration arrangements.

The product owner would decide whether and how to release after technical acceptance. The distribution route, publisher account, packaging and submission responsibilities still need agreement. Store submission or approval would have its own status; passing these checks would establish only the tested behavior. Later maintenance would need a separate scope.

Open questions before agreeing work

• Which exact browser versions and device restrictions must the first package satisfy? The QA lead will supply the inventory.
• Which tracker interface and authentication method can be used? The tracker administrator will provide documentation and a test access plan.
• Should drafts survive closing the extension or restarting the browser? The product owner will define that behavior and removal rules.
• How can a tester reconcile an uncertain send with the tracker? The developer and tracker administrator will propose a check before retry behavior is agreed.
• What distribution route and handover materials does the team need? The product owner will name the release decision maker and confirm responsibilities.

This request is ready for a scope discussion with those questions still visible. Browser coverage, feasibility, timing and commercial terms would be confirmed for the individual project.

Copy the brief template

Select and copy the structure below into your own document or message. Fill the parts you know and mark the rest as open. Keep sensitive access details in an agreed private handover process.

Browser extension project brief

Goal and user task
- Intended user:
- What they do today:
- One action the extension should help them complete:
- Expected result:

Current state and first scope
- Idea, specification, codebase or released extension:
- Existing materials available for review:
- Included in the first scope:
- Outside the first scope:

Browsers and constraints
- Requested browsers, versions and devices:
- Sites or contexts where it should work:
- Device, access or distribution restrictions:
- Browser coverage still to confirm:

Data and access
- Inputs, source and proposed destination:
- What users review before an action:
- Required access to review:
- Storage, access and removal requirements:
- Dummy data available for checks:

Integrations
- System to connect to and responsible owner:
- Documentation and test environment available:
- Expected success result:
- Behavior when access is refused or the system is unavailable:
- How an unknown outcome should be checked before retrying:

Acceptance checks (repeat for each essential behavior)
- Test setup and action:
- Expected observable result:
- Package and browsers to check:
- Who reviews it:
- Actual result and unresolved items:

Handover and release
- Required materials and access:
- Technical acceptance owner:
- Intended distribution route:
- Release decision maker:
- Packaging, submission and maintenance work to agree:

Open questions
- Question:
- Person responsible for resolving it:
- Decision or evidence needed:

Planning constraints
- Target date or dependency, if any:
- Commercial constraints to discuss, if any:

Turn the brief into the next conversation

Send the user task, current state and the main open question through the existing development contact form. A contact and a short description are enough to begin. Add a filled brief later if it helps explain the scope.

For the service scope and more detailed browser checks, see browser extension development. Extcorp reviews development requests individually; the requested browsers, work, release involvement, timing and terms are agreed for that project.