About
Most teams we meet ship faster than they can test. Not because they are careless — because regression testing is the first thing that gets skipped when a release is due, and the last thing anyone wants to own. So bugs reach customers, and the team finds out from a support ticket instead of from a test.
The expensive part of QA turned out not to be finding the bug. It is everything after: reproducing it, screenshotting it, writing it up, deciding how bad it is, getting it in front of the right developer, and remembering to check whether it was ever actually fixed. That work is mechanical, it is repetitive, and it is exactly what software should be doing.
So QA Spider does the whole loop: it runs the suites, and when something breaks it writes the report from the run itself, files it where your developers already work, and tells your team. What is left for the humans is the part that actually needs judgement — deciding what is worth testing, and fixing what is broken.
How we work
01
When a test fails, the only honest answers are “the test is wrong” or “the product is wrong”. We classify which, fix the former and report the latter. A green dashboard that was bought by deleting an inconvenient assertion is worse than no dashboard, because you would have trusted it.
02
Filing a ticket into your tracker, posting into your chat, running against something that looks like production — each one waits for an explicit approval. Automation should remove your busywork, not make decisions on your behalf.
03
Steps to reproduce taken from what actually ran. The failure screenshot. What was expected and what happened instead. If a developer has to reproduce the bug themselves before they can start, the report failed at its job.
04
We test your application from the outside, the way a user meets it. We do not need your source code, and we do not ask for it.
Tell us what you are shipping and we will run a pilot crawl of your staging environment — you will see the coverage we would propose before you pay for anything.