[BUG] Cannot use regex with ids

[7ammer]

Description

A clear and concise description of the bug.

Steps to Reproduce

1. Run command maestro-runner test my-flow.yaml
2. With flow file (see below)
3. See error (see bel)

Expected Behaviour

I expect maestro-runnner to be able use regex when selecting the ID value. See: https://docs.maestro.dev/maestro-flows/flow-control-and-logic/how-to-use-selectors#best-practices (Handle Dynamic Values with Regex)

Actual Behaviour

See error. Regex did not appear to be used.

Environment

• OS: macOS 26.3
• Go version: go1.26.0
• maestro-runner version: 1.0.7
• Executor: UIAutomator2??? (not sure)
• Device/Simulator: pixel6 API 34 Emulator

Flow File

appId: abc
---
- assertVisible:
    id: my-item-id_.*

Error Output

assertVisible: id="my-item-id_.*" (17.0s)
      ╰─ Element not visible: context deadline exceeded: no such element: An element could not be located on the page using the given search parameters

[omnarayan]

Thanks for the detailed report, @7ammer, really helpful. We're on it and will keep you updated.

[omnarayan]

@7ammer Thanks again for catching this one — your reports have been incredibly helpful in improving maestro-runner! 🙏

We've fixed this and verified it end-to-end on a real device. Here are the results:

Device: Pixel 4a, Android 13

Test Results

Test	Pattern	UIAutomator2	Appium	DeviceLab
Wildcard	username-.*, password-.*, login-.*, products-.*	✅ PASS	✅ PASS	✅ PASS
Suffix anchor	username.*-input$, login.*-button$	✅ PASS	✅ PASS	✅ PASS
Alternation	(username|email)-input, (login|signin)-button	✅ PASS	✅ PASS	✅ PASS
Character class	[a-z]+-input, \w+-button	✅ PASS	✅ PASS	✅ PASS

You can grab the fix via the interim release:

curl -fsSL https://open.devicelab.dev/install/maestro-runner | bash -s -- --version 1.0.8-rc1

Or build from source if you prefer.

Let us know how it goes — thanks for helping us make this better! 💪

[7ammer]

Hi @omnarayan,

I gave this a test on android and all works ask expected 🙌

[omnarayan]

@7ammer Thanks for confirming! Could you please close the issue from your end? We follow the practice of having the reporter close it, since they're best positioned to verify the fix. Otherwise, it'll be auto-closed with the next release.