The diff lies
Review looks at the change. QA looks at behavior. A “correct” PR can leave checkout red and the acceptance criterion green.
The fifth step of the cycle — and the Achilles heel of agent-written code. Test against the spec, not against intuition. We are not selling it yet. There is no date.
Under construction · No billing or launch date · The cycle already closes today with Review
We prefer not to date what we do not yet use ourselves every day.
Review looks at the change. QA looks at behavior. A “correct” PR can leave checkout red and the acceptance criterion green.
Acceptance criteria are useless if nobody runs them. QA turns the spec into cases, not footer text on the PR.
The client does not buy a merge. They buy that the product does what they asked. Without test evidence, the factory delivers opinion.
Test against the spec, not against intuition.
Spec criteria become cases that someone — or something — runs against the change.
The agent fulfills AURA-118 and breaks the coupon flow. QA looks at the product, not only the diff.
What was tested, against which criterion, with what result. The same language as Review. For the CTO and for the factory's client.
QA will not “come included” in a plan to fill the table. When it exists, it will have its own price. Until then there is no row to sell and no date to miss. Review already verifies intent, coherence, quality, and security on every Pull Request.
Some software factories do not need Spec or Orchestra: they need evidence that what they delivered behaves. Tell us how you test today. There is no waitlist with a date. There is a conversation to build this with people who will actually use it.