AI assistant for QA engineers: test cases from requirements and defects you don't have to rewrite
Finding the bug is your job. The assistant takes what surrounds it: breaks requirements down into checks, writes up defects in the team's template, compiles the test run report and verifies that the regression missed nothing.
What it does
- breaks a requirement down into checks and edge cases
- writes up a defect properly: steps, expected, actual, environment
- prepares a regression checklist for a specific release
- checks interface copy for errors and inconsistencies
- assembles the test run report for the team
What it does not do
The limits are set in advance
- does not decide whether the release ships
- does not replace manual testing of complex scenarios
How much time it frees up
By our reviews, a QA engineer spends roughly
13 hours a week on the routine listed above — more than a third of the working week. The assistant does not take all of it: some tasks you will still be checking. But checking something finished is faster than doing it from scratch, and the gain lies in exactly that difference.
How it works
The assistant is deployed alongside your existing workflow and speaks the language of your stack. It does not try to replace the engineering decision — it removes the scaffolding that leaves you only half a day for the decision itself.
How the assistant handles a QA engineer's routine
A checklist and test cases from requirements
The analyst sent a three-page feature description. The assistant pulls out the conditions, boundary values and roles and builds a draft checklist: positive, negative, boundary cases, what to check for each role. It also lists the places where the requirement is ambiguous — handy to raise at grooming before development interprets something its own way. You add the non-standard scenarios instead of building the table from scratch.
A defect written up correctly first time
You found a bug — you write three lines to the assistant in chat: what you did, what you expected, what you got, plus a screenshot. The assistant writes up the defect in your tracker's template: numbered steps to reproduce, environment, version, priority by your matrix, a duplicate check against similar titles. The developer gets a reproducible case, not "the button doesn't work".
A test run report without a manual summary
After the regression you need to tell the team what was checked, what failed, what is blocked. The assistant compiles the report from the run results: percentages, the list of open defects with priorities, the areas not reached and why. You edit the conclusions; the table and the wording it does itself.
A regression that doesn't miss what changed
Before the release the assistant compares the list of changes in the version with your regression suite and shows: here are changes with no checks, here are cases that haven't been run for a long time. What to add to the run is your decision, but the list of blind spots is already in front of you.
Test data for a specific case
You need twenty users with different statuses, three orders with boundary amounts and an address in a rare format. The assistant generates the set from your description of the structure, in the format needed for import or a query — without filling in tables by hand.
What the dialogue looks like
You: Bug: in the payment form, with an amount of 0.01 the "Pay" button is active, and after clicking — a white screen. Chrome, test-2 environment, build 4.12.7. Screenshot attached.
Assistant: Wrote up the defect in the template: title "White screen after paying the minimum amount of 0.01 ₽", steps 1–5, expected result — a minimum amount message, actual — a blank page with no error. Priority by the matrix — high (blocks payment). Found no similar open defects, but there is a closed DEF-812 about the amount 0 — referenced it. Send to the tracker?
You: Send it. And add a boundary-amount case to the regression.
Assistant: Defect created, DEF-1047. Added the case "Payment: boundary amounts 0, 0.01, maximum" to the regression suite with a link to the defect.
What we need from you at the start
- The defect template and priority matrix adopted by the team.
- The test case and checklist format: where you keep them, which fields are mandatory.
- Access to the requirement descriptions and the list of changes per version — in whatever form they exist.
- A couple of defects you have written up and one test run — as a sample of style and level of detail.
Implementation timeline
The review is one conversation. Setting up the templates takes two to three days. We go through the first feature together: the assistant builds the checklist and writes up the first defects, you correct them. By the second sprint it works without formatting corrections. Usually about a week and a half.
Frequently asked questions
Won't it start closing defects or changing statuses by itself?
No. The assistant creates drafts and suggests, but acts in the tracker only on your confirmation — or not at all, if that suits the team better.
No. The assistant creates drafts and suggests, but acts in the tracker only on your confirmation — or not at all, if that suits the team better.
We have automated tests. Is this about them?
Partly: the assistant helps describe scenarios and analyse failed runs from the logs, but the test automation code stays with you or the automation engineer.
Partly: the assistant helps describe scenarios and analyse failed runs from the logs, but the test automation code stays with you or the automation engineer.
Our requirements are often verbal.
Then the assistant builds the checklist from your notes after the discussion and immediately shows what was left unsaid. This works even better than with long documents.
Then the assistant builds the checklist from your notes after the discussion and immediately shows what was left unsaid. This works even better than with long documents.
Will it work for a single QA engineer on a project?
Yes, and that is exactly when the effect is most noticeable: write-ups and reports stop eating half the day.
Yes, and that is exactly when the effect is most noticeable: write-ups and reports stop eating half the day.
What it costs
Task review and configuration of one assistantfrom ₽12,000 (≈ $142)
An extra task beyond the basic fivefrom ₽3,000 (≈ $36)
Training for you or a member of stafffrom ₽5,000 (≈ $59)
Support and adjustments, per monthfrom ₽4,000 (≈ $47)
Build an assistant like this
Tell us which tasks eat the most of your time, and we will say which of them are worth handing to an assistant first and which are better kept for yourself.
Message our Telegram bot — instant reply
or leave a request via the form below — we reply within 30 minutes