QA automation services: Playwright tests that run in your CI

QA automation services set up software that tests your product for you: scripts that open a real browser, go through signup, checkout or your core feature the way a user would, and fail the build if something breaks. We build that suite in Playwright, run it in your CI on every pull request, and hand it over so your team owns it.

This is one of two ways we deliver QA services. The other is agentic QA, where AI agents keep the tests up to date for you.

Why manual release testing stops working

Manual testing works when the product is small. As it grows, the checklist grows with it, and these problems appear:

• The release checklist takes half a day. So releases get batched, which makes each release riskier, which makes the checklist longer.
• The bug is in the part nobody touched. A change to the pricing page breaks the invoice download in account settings. No one thought to check, because no one changed it.
• Tests exist but don’t run. A developer wrote end-to-end tests once. They only run on that developer’s laptop, and only when they remember.
• The flaky suite. Tests fail one run in five for no clear reason. The team reruns until it’s green, which means a real failure gets rerun away too.

Automated end-to-end tests in CI fix this by checking the same flows on every change, in minutes, without anyone having to remember.

How Playwright test automation works in your pipeline

Playwright is an open-source framework from Microsoft that controls real browsers (Chromium, Firefox and WebKit) from test code. The tests are written in TypeScript and live in your repository next to your application code, so they are reviewed, versioned and changed like any other code.

Here’s what happens with E2E testing in CI/CD once the suite is in place:

1. A developer opens a pull request.
2. Your CI (GitHub Actions or GitLab CI) starts the suite against a preview or staging environment.
3. Tests run in parallel across browsers, typically finishing within minutes. We tune parallelism and sharding to keep it that way.
4. If a test fails, the pull request is marked as failing, and the CI run links to a report with a screenshot, a video and a Playwright trace you can step through action by action.
5. A scheduled run checks production’s most important flows (read-only smoke tests) so you hear about outages before customers do.

We build the suite to stay stable. Tests find elements by role and label, the way users and screen readers do, instead of brittle CSS selectors. Each test creates its own data, logins are handled once and reused, and setup goes through your API where possible, so tests don’t spend minutes clicking through forms they aren’t testing.

How we deliver your test suite

1. Flow mapping (days 1–3). In a short workshop we list your user flows and rank them by business risk: what costs you money or trust if it breaks. We agree the final list in writing.
2. Foundations (week 1). Project structure, configuration, test data strategy, authentication handling and the CI workflow. The first test runs in CI by the end of the week.
3. Test writing (weeks 2–3). We cover each agreed flow, including the main path and the variations that matter. A senior engineer reviews every test. We run the suite repeatedly to catch flakiness before you do.
4. CI hardening. Required status checks on pull requests, readable reports, optional notifications to Slack or Microsoft Teams, and a scheduled production smoke run.
5. Handover. Documentation and a walkthrough session with your developers: how to run tests locally, add one, and debug a failure.

What you do: give us access to a staging environment, test accounts and your CI, and review our pull requests. What we do: everything else.

We agree the timeline in the proposal. For a suite covering your core flows, plan for two to four weeks.

What you get

• A Playwright suite in TypeScript, in your repository, covering every agreed flow
• A CI workflow for GitHub Actions or GitLab CI that runs on every pull request, plus a scheduled production smoke run
• HTML reports with screenshots, videos and traces for every failure
• Test data and login setup that works without manual steps
• Handover documentation: running tests locally, adding a test, debugging a failure, and the conventions we used
• A list of the bugs we found while writing the tests (there are almost always some)

Who it’s for

A good fit:

• Teams with developers who can own and extend the tests after handover
• Web applications: SaaS products, e-commerce stores, marketplaces, internal tools
• Teams on GitHub or GitLab that want a required test check on every pull request
• Teams replacing a flaky Cypress or Selenium suite nobody trusts

Not a good fit:

• If nobody on your team will maintain the tests, agentic QA is the better choice
• If you need unit test coverage, your own developers are better placed to write it
• Native iOS or Android apps, which need different tools