Launched this week
QApilot's CoWork
3x Mobile Automation. Same QE Team.
636 followers
3x Mobile Automation. Same QE Team.
636 followers
CoWork turns existing test cases into executable mobile automation with AI planning, human-approved replanning, and real-device execution on iOS, Android, and Flutter.
Interactive
Payment Required
Launch Team / Built With
Congrats on the launch! 🚀
I like the human-approved replanning approach. Mobile automation often breaks on small UI changes, popups, so having AI adapt while still asking for approval feels like the right balance.
Curious how CoWork handles flaky test behavior across different real devices and OS versions.
QApilot's CoWork
QApilot's CoWork
Solid
QApilot's CoWork
Mobile QA is a strong place for automation because the bottleneck is rarely one test; it is the repeated device, environment, and regression coverage that slows teams down.
The “same QE team, 3x automation” positioning is interesting. I’d be curious how QApilot handles flaky tests and app-state changes, because reliability is usually what determines whether QA teams trust automation or keep falling back to manual checks.
QApilot's CoWork
The replanning loop is what gets me here — most AI test tools fail silently when the UI changes, and you end up with flaky tests nobody trusts. Human-approved replanning before re-execution is the right call.
Curious how CoWork handles cases where the AI's planned steps diverge significantly from the original test intent — does the human reviewer see a diff of the original vs proposed plan, or just the new steps in isolation?
Congrats on the launch 🚀
QApilot's CoWork
@renaldo_loko - Thank you, and Great question. The human reviewer does see the diff. The original plan vs the adapted plan. And the decision is with the human whether or not to accept the adapted plan for the future runs.
@charan_tej_kammara That's the right call — a diff view is exactly what you need for trust.
Seeing "here's what was planned, here's what changed, and why" gives reviewers the context to make meaningful decisions rather than rubber-stamping a black box.
Follow-up: do you track accept/reject rates over time per test case? Curious whether certain UI patterns (e.g. dynamic content, animations) generate more replanning requests than others — could be a useful signal for prioritization.
QApilot's CoWork
@renaldo_loko - All of the information associated with acceptance/rejection of dynamic replans is saved. It is such a good idea to present this information in a report. Agree that it comes handy. Thank you!
The honest-fail behaviour looks great. I'm curious about human-in-loop at scale though, if a nightly run throws 12 approvals at 2am, you're babysitting again. Does CoWork remember an approved change so it stops re-asking on every run after that?
QApilot's CoWork
@amanpreet_zop - Definitely. CoWork gives the control to the quality assurance engineer to ingest the approved changes into the test suite so that the updated replans act as the original plan for all the future runs.
QApilot's CoWork