Go/No-Go release checklist: criteria and a template you can copy
A Go/No-Go checklist for software releases: the criteria that matter, who makes the call, examples of No-Go conditions and a template to paste into your release ticket.
NewThe 60-day pilot, at half price
A clear Go or No-Go before every release.
AI QA for startups: Claude agents write, run and maintain your web, API and mobile tests. A human QA engineer reviews every change and signs the release call. One flat monthly price.
- US$1,000 a month for the first 60 days
- Month-to-month, cancel anytime
- Tests stay in your repository
Release 1.8.0 · Go/No-Go
GO- Flows tested
- 48
- Failures reviewed
- 3 of 3
- Open blockers
- 0
- Sign-up and loginpass
- Checkout and paymentpass
- New feature: saved cartsexplored
- Flaky tests this cyclefixed
- Slow search on big catalogsaccepted risk
Signed by the QA engineer. Shipping stays your decision.
Tests in open tools your team can read and keep
- Playwright
- TypeScript
- Appium
- Maestro
- Mobilewright
- Claude Agent SDK
Watch
Releaseworthy in 80 seconds
What we do, how a release gets its Go or No-Go, and what it costs.
The player loads from YouTube only when you press play (what that means). You can also watch it on YouTube.
The problem
Testing falls behind the code
Small teams ship fast. Without someone who owns quality, the same four things happen.
Without a QA function
- Features ship faster than anyone can test them, and the riskiest flows are often the least tested.
- Flaky tests get muted instead of fixed, so nobody trusts a red build.
- Releases go out on gut feel. Nobody can say what was tested or what risk is left.
- Hiring a QA team takes time and money that a small company would rather put into the product.
With Releaseworthy
- Your user flows are ranked by risk, and the ones that would hurt most are covered first.
- A flaky test is traced to its cause and fixed, so a red build means something again.
- Every release gets a signed Go/No-Go report: what was tested, what failed, what risk is left.
- A working QA function from the first week, for one flat monthly price.
What you get
A QA function, without building one
All of it is part of every month, for web, API and mobile.
Test strategy and a risk-based plan
We map your critical user flows and the ways they can fail, then agree what to test first and how deeply.
Automated tests that you own
Web tests in Playwright + TypeScript, API tests, and mobile tests in Appium, Maestro or Mobilewright. They live in your repository and run in your CI.
tests/checkout.spec.ts test('checkout with a saved card', async ({ page }) => { await page.goto('/cart'); await page.getByRole('button', { name: 'Pay now' }).click(); await expect(page.getByText('Order confirmed')).toBeVisible(); });Maintenance and triage of flaky tests
Tests are updated when the product changes. A flaky test is traced to its cause and fixed, not muted.
Exploratory testing of new features
New features get hands-on testing by a person, not only scripted checks.
Bug reports with evidence
Every bug comes with steps to reproduce, expected and actual results, and evidence such as screenshots, video or logs.
A Go/No-Go report before each release
What was tested, what failed, the open risks and a clear recommendation, signed off by the QA engineer. Shipping stays your decision.
Async updates, in your chat
Questions and updates go to your team's chat: a channel in your Slack, Discord or Telegram, or a seat in your workspace, in your time zone.
How it works
How your QA engineer gets you to full coverage
Claude agents do the repetitive test work and a human QA engineer reviews every change. You see each step in your own chat.
01Week 1
Your app, mapped and ranked by risk
You share a test environment, test accounts and access to open pull requests. The agents explore the app and draft your user flows; your QA engineer ranks them by how much a failure would hurt and agrees the plan with you, in your own chat.
02Weeks 2 to 4
Critical flows run on every pull request
Tests arrive as pull requests in your repository, in plain Playwright and TypeScript. Your QA engineer reviews each one before it merges, and from then on they run in your CI on every change.
03Every release
A person reviews every failure
A real bug gets a report with video, logs and steps to reproduce, and holds the release until it is fixed. A flaky test is traced and fixed, not muted. Then you get a signed Go or No-Go.
Illustrations with example messages, not a client conversation.
The 60-day pilot
Judge it on your own product, at half price
US$1,000 a month for the first 60 days instead of US$2,000. The full service, success criteria agreed in writing, and every test stays yours if you stop.
Week 1
Plan and first tests
Access set up, your user flows ranked by risk, success criteria agreed in writing, and the first tests running in your CI.
Weeks 2 to 4
Critical flows covered
The flows that would hurt most if they broke run on every pull request, and a person reviews every failure.
Weeks 5 to 8
The full rhythm
Exploratory testing of new features, a weekly digest in your chat and a Go/No-Go report before each release.
Day 60
You decide
We review the results against the success criteria with you. Continue at US$2,000 a month, or stop and keep everything.
Platforms
AI testing for web, API and mobile, in one service
Not just the web. Tests are written in tools your team can read, maintain and keep after the service ends.
- Web
Playwright + TypeScript
End-to-end tests in Playwright + TypeScript. Playwright Test runs tests in parallel across Chromium, Firefox and WebKit.
- API
Endpoints and journeys
Tests for single endpoints and multistep journeys, written in TypeScript and run in the same pipeline as the web tests.
- Mobile
Appium, Maestro or Mobilewright
iOS and Android tests. We choose the framework that fits your app best:
- AppiumOpen-source UI automation for iOS, Android and other platforms.
- MaestroOpen-source mobile UI testing, with flows written as human-readable YAML.
- MobilewrightTypeScript tests for iOS and Android with an API like Playwright's, from the makers of Mobile MCP.
Pricing
One monthly price. The whole QA job.
No fees per run, no AI credits, no hourly billing. A user flow is one end-to-end journey through your product, such as sign-up or checkout.
Start here
60-day pilot
US$1,000per month
For the first 60 days, half price. Then US$2,000 a month if you continue.
The full service on your own product, so you can judge it on real releases.
- Everything in Monthly, nothing held back
- Written success criteria in week 1
- First tests in your CI in week 1
- Cancel anytime and keep every test
Monthly
US$2,000per month
Up to 500 user flows. Beyond that, US$4 per flow per month.
The whole QA job for one flat price, month-to-month.
- Unlimited test runs in your CI
- Web, API and mobile
- A Go/No-Go report before each release
- Support in your chat, in your time zone
Want to see our work first? Start with the Release Risk Audit: 5 working days on your product for US$490.
Proof you can inspect
See the approach on real code
agentic-qa is a public sample project: Claude agents doing the QA work on a demo shop we built. It has a test plan, Playwright + TypeScript tests for the API and the web app, bug triage and a live Go/No-Go report published from CI.
An honest note. The demo runs against a shop built for the purpose, so it shows how the work is done, not results for a client. There are no client logos or testimonials on this site. That is what the 60-day pilot is for: proof on your own product.
Who owns the tests?
You do. The tests are committed to your repository and run in your CI, so they stay with you if the service ends.
Do the agents change our code without a person checking?
No. The agents propose changes as pull requests. A QA engineer reviews every change before it is merged and owns every release call.
What does it cost?
US$2,000 per month for up to 500 user flows, month-to-month. New clients start with a 60-day pilot at US$1,000 per month, half price. Beyond 500 flows, US$4 per flow per month. No hourly billing and no fees per run. See the pricing page.
How do we start?
With the 60-day pilot. Email us about your product. If it is a fit, you get a written proposal with a short video of how we would test your product. Then we agree the scope and the success criteria in a short written agreement, and the first tests run in your CI in week 1. Want to see our work first? Start with the Release Risk Audit: 5 working days for US$490, credited against the 60-day pilot if you continue (terms).
Can we talk to someone before we decide?
Yes. If you are still deciding after the proposal, or have questions it does not answer, we book a Google Meet call at a time that suits you, in your time zone. Ask for a call by email.
What if it does not work out?
Cancel anytime; billing stops at the end of that month. You keep every test, plan and report, because they already live in your repository. There is nothing to export and nothing to unwind.
Do you test mobile apps too?
Yes. Web, API and mobile are all part of the same service. Mobile tests use Appium, Maestro or Mobilewright, and we choose the one that fits your app best.
Which time zone do you work in?
Yours. We work in your time zone, and day-to-day talk happens in your team's chat, such as Slack, Discord or Telegram.
Is this an Anthropic product?
No. The agents are built with the Claude Agent SDK and run on Claude, an AI model made by Anthropic. Releaseworthy is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Anthropic.
Blog
Guides from the blog
Agentic testing with Playwright: how AI agents plan, write and repair tests
How AI agents do QA work with Playwright today: the loop, the tools (test agents, MCP, Agent SDK), where agents go wrong and the guardrails that work.
QA for startups: a checklist by stage, and who should do the testing
A QA checklist for each startup stage, from first customer to growing team, and an honest comparison of hiring, outsourcing, managed QA and AI tools.
Tell us what you are shipping next
One email is enough to start: your product, your platforms and how often you release. You get a plain answer on fit and, if it fits, a written proposal for the 60-day pilot with a short video of how we would test your product.
Or write to qa@releaseworthy.app. Still deciding after the proposal? We book a Google Meet call for your questions.