SERVICE
QA and test automation
Tests that catch real regressions and do not cry wolf.
What this actually is
The purpose of a test suite is to let people change things confidently. A suite that is slow, flaky or checks the wrong layer does the opposite: it gets ignored, then disabled, then deleted, and the confidence goes with it.
Most of the value is in choosing the right level. Unit tests for logic, integration tests for the seams where systems actually break, and a small number of end-to-end tests covering the journeys that would cost you money. Inverting that is the most common and most expensive mistake.
What we do
Assessment
What is covered, what is flaky, how long the suite takes, and which failures anyone still believes.
Strategy
Which layer each check belongs at, so the suite is fast enough to run on every change.
Automation
Tests written to survive refactoring — asserting on behaviour rather than on internal structure.
CI integration
Fast feedback on every pull request, with the slow suite on a schedule rather than blocking everyone.
Flake elimination
Treating an intermittent test as a defect. A suite people distrust is worse than no suite, because it costs time and gives nothing back.
The stack
What it connects to
Integration surface is the honest driver of effort — ten systems is not ten times one system.
- CI providers and pull-request checks
- Issue trackers for failure triage
- Staging and preview environments
- Test data management and seeding
- Observability, to correlate failures with releases
How a project runs
Audit
1 week
Coverage, runtime, flake rate and where the real risk sits.
Strategy
3–5 days
The layer each check belongs at, and what to stop testing.
Build
3–8 weeks
Suites at each level, running in CI on every change.
Handover
1–2 weeks
Your team writing and maintaining them, with the patterns documented.
Where teams use it
Pre-release
A launch where a regression would be visible to everyone at once.
Legacy codebases
Adding a safety net around behaviour before changing any of it.
Slow suites
A pipeline nobody waits for, so it gets skipped and then bypassed.
Regulated products
Where evidence of testing is a requirement rather than good practice.
Performance
Load testing before a campaign rather than after the site falls over during one.
When this is the wrong answer
Coverage percentage is not a quality metric. A suite at 90% that tests getters and misses the checkout flow is worse than one at 40% that does the opposite.
End-to-end tests are the most expensive to write and maintain and the slowest to run. A handful covering revenue-critical journeys is right; a hundred is a maintenance burden that will be abandoned.
Automation does not replace exploratory testing. Automated checks confirm what you thought of; people find what you did not.
If nobody fixes a failing test within a day, more tests will not help. That is a process problem and it has to be solved first.
Frequently asked questions
What coverage should we aim for?
Whatever covers the paths where a bug costs money. We would rather have deliberate coverage of the critical journeys than a number that looks good in a report.
Our tests are flaky. Can that be fixed?
Almost always. Flakiness is usually timing assumptions, shared state between tests, or asserting on things that were never deterministic — all fixable, and worth fixing because a distrusted suite is dead weight.
Can you test our existing app?
Yes, and it is common. The first pass covers the highest-risk journeys so there is a safety net before anything else changes.
Do we need a dedicated QA team?
Not usually. Engineers writing tests as part of the work produces better tests than a separate team writing them afterwards, because the person who wrote the code knows where it is fragile.
Who owns the code?
You do, from the first commit — work happens in your repository under your licence, and the contract assigns IP outright. We keep no rights and build no dependency that makes leaving expensive.
What does it cost?
We do not publish a number, because the honest one depends on scope, integrations and the accuracy bar. Tell us the budget you are working with and we will say what it buys — or say plainly if it does not buy enough.
Related
Before you choose anyone
Written to be useful whether or not you hire us — including the parts that argue against hiring an agency at all.
How to choose an AI development company
ReadAI agency vs in-house team
ReadCustom AI vs off-the-shelf
ReadOffshore vs local AI development
ReadAI Voice Agents: The Complete Guide for Businesses (2026)
ReadRAG vs Fine-Tuning: Which Does Your Business Need?
ReadHow Much Does AI Development Cost in 2026?
ReadQA & Test Automation — tell us the scope
Tell us what you are building. We reply within one business day.