S1 · AI-Native QA & SDET · Test failure
From a red test to a handoff a developer can act on.
You get source-linked evidence, candidate explanations to test and one next check for a person to approve. Higher levels add criteria for judging AI features, a reviewed way to add AI-assisted tests and an owned testing path that several teams can follow.
Who it is for: QA engineers, SDETs and developers who own failing or flaky tests, and leads who now have to test AI features as well.
How it works, proof and the common objection
How it works
Each level runs the same loop: preserve the evidence, keep facts and hypotheses apart, stop at a human gate, and write the result into a report. Local code checks the record you supply, so every gap is listed by name.
Proof from the release build
- Five workflows with 251 automated tests, all passing in our run of the 2026-10-01 release build.
- Worked examples with sample data at L2, L3 and L4: an IT helpdesk assistant, a booking calendar and a claims team.
- English and Polish guidebooks in every package; the field guides at L2, L3 and L4 run 122, 146 and 168 pages.
Common objection: “My failures are messy and my stack is unusual.”
You bring one sanitized failure record and declare the scope. The workflow does the intake, the evidence list and the next check for that case. It does not read your repository, run your tests or claim to fix anything, and every report lists what is still unknown. Start with the free L0 workflow on one real failure.

Failure Evidence Triage Workflow
Turn one noisy test failure into a clear next step, and see which parts are facts and which are guesses.
What you get and who it is for
- A failure record in which every fact points to the log line it came from.
- Your own hypotheses listed apart from the evidence, with any conflict between sources kept in view.
- One next action for a person to approve, left at NOT_RUN until someone actually runs it.
Also inside (2)
- An HTML triage report from one command on the bundled sample, plus English and Polish guidebooks including a 15-page guide to auditing a failure bundle.
- A blank input template with a field guide, so you can run the same command on your own sanitized failure, and 25 automated tests.
Best for: Anyone with a fresh failing test who wants to think clearly before changing code or escalating. You need: Node.js 22 and a terminal.
Next: L1 START, Test Failure Triage Workflow, takes one failed test to source-linked evidence, candidate explanations to test, a next-check proposal and a handoff a developer can act on.
Freeno payment
Get it freeAlso on GumroadChoose the checkout you prefer; receipts and updates come from where you buy.
Test Failure Triage Workflow
Turn one failed test into a source-linked handoff: the evidence, the candidate explanations to test and one next check a developer can act on.
What you get and who it is for
- Six artifacts from one command: a normalized failure record, source-linked evidence, bounded classification candidates, a next-check proposal, and a triage handoff as Markdown and as a standalone HTML page.
- A stop rule: incomplete, blocked or instruction-bearing input returns BLOCKED with the stop reason and the missing evidence listed.
- Five single-purpose skills for your AI assistant: failure intake, evidence preserver, failure classifier, proposal reviewer and ticket drafter. Each carries an expert playbook with a procedure, a checklist, common mistakes and a worked example on the bundled data.
Also inside (1)
- Frozen sample failures (ready, incomplete, contradictory, malicious-as-data and hold-out), a blank input template with a field guide for your own failure, 42 automated tests, and handoffs in English and Polish.
Best for: QA engineers and SDETs who hand failures to developers every week and want the same evidence standard each time. You need: Node.js 22 and a terminal.
Next: L2 UNDERSTAND, AI Application Evaluation, applies the same evidence discipline to an AI feature: criteria, sample cases and a result review the team can inspect.
$19one-time, USD
Get L1 in our storeAlso on GumroadChoose the checkout you prefer; receipts and updates come from where you buy.
AI Application Evaluation
Replace 'does the answer feel right?' with criteria, cases and results the team can inspect.
What you get and who it is for
- An evaluation contract, a fixture plan, a result review and an open-risk list, written as JSON and as an HTML report.
- Deterministic checks, semantic criteria and prohibited outcomes kept apart, each with an owner and pass, fail and unresolved definitions.
- A CI evaluation gate for GitHub Actions, GitLab CI or make that returns a verdict per critical segment, with two policies (default and exploratory).
Also inside (2)
- Editable templates: decision record, RACI, risk register, rubric, review checklist and a stakeholder one-pager.
- A worked IT-helpdesk example with generated English and Polish reports, a 122-page field guide and 61 automated tests.
Best for: QA leads and engineers who must judge an AI feature before release and need more than a demo to point to. You need: Node.js 22 and a terminal.
Next: L3 APPLY, AI Test Automation Review, helps you choose which AI-assisted tests are worth writing, propose the smallest change and name who maintains it.

AI Test Automation Review
Choose which tests are worth automating with AI help, propose the smallest change, and name who maintains it.
What you get and who it is for
- A test contract, an automation proposal, a validation checklist and a maintenance plan from one command, as JSON, Markdown and HTML.
- A target register and policy rubric for picking stable, valuable targets before anyone generates test volume.
- An ADR (architecture decision record) template to record why a test change was accepted or rejected, plus a RACI and a review checklist.
Also inside (2)
- CI wiring examples for GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, pre-commit and make.
- A worked booking-calendar example in English and Polish, a 146-page field guide and 43 automated tests.
Best for: Test-automation engineers whose AI-assisted suite is growing and who want quality and cost to stay under human ownership. You need: Node.js 22 and a terminal.
Next: L4 SCALE, Enterprise AI Testing Operating Blueprint, turns these practices into an owned, observable path across teams, with gates and a staged rollout.

Enterprise AI Testing Operating Blueprint
Give several teams one owned, observable AI testing path, with gates and a rollout plan.
What you get and who it is for
- An operating blueprint, an ownership matrix, an observability plan and rollout decisions, in one HTML report with JSON and Markdown.
- Templates for controls, evidence, exceptions, signals, ownership, gate policy and a risk register.
- A scheduled-run guide plus CI and pre-commit examples, so the gates run without someone remembering to run them.
Also inside (2)
- Two worked scenarios from a claims team (a draft and a ready version), a 168-page field guide and 80 automated tests.
- The complete series: every earlier workflow of AI-Native QA & SDET is inside this level.
Best for: Technical leads and quality owners who need AI testing to have an owner, an escalation path and a recovery route across teams. You need: Node.js 22 and a terminal.
Next: You have the complete AI-Native QA & SDET series. The natural next series is AI Evaluation & Reliability, which measures how the AI feature itself behaves.
$149one-time, USD
Get L4 in our storeL4 SCALE is $50 more than L3 and adds the operating blueprint for running AI testing across teams; every level below it is included.What you paid for any lower level of the same series counts toward any higher level (L1 START at $19 makes L4 SCALE cost $130). How to claim it





























