Bugster’s cover photo
Bugster

Bugster

Software Development

Dover, Delaware 1,578 followers

The AI QA Engineer

About us

Bugster runs in real browsers on every Pull Request — no fixed scripts, fast setup, always evolving.

Website
https://www.bugster.dev/
Industry
Software Development
Company size
2-10 employees
Headquarters
Dover, Delaware
Type
Privately Held
Founded
2024
Specialties
Quality Assurance, Software Testing, Artificial Intelligence, Test Automation, Test Management Tool, and Automation Framework

Locations

Employees at Bugster

Updates

  • Bugster reposted this

    De nada sirve crear un test rápido... Si correr la suite completa te lleva horas. La verdadera agilidad no es automatizar una prueba aislada. Es tener la confianza de lanzar toda tu regresión cada vez que subís a producción, sin frenar al equipo de desarrollo. Muchos equipos vuelven al QA manual porque mantener las suites de scripts es insoportable. Ya no tiene que ser así. Les grabé esta demo rápida mostrando cómo Bugster resuelve esto. Miren el video. Agrupamos tests individuales en una suite completa (como el flujo completo de un E-commerce) y la lanzamos a ejecutar en paralelo con un solo clic. Cero código. Reportes automáticos. Mantenimiento mínimo. Les dejo el acceso directo en el primer comentario para que configuren su primera suite de regresión gratis hoy mismo. Confianza.

  • Bugster reposted this

    Automatizar QA no debería llevar semanas. Grabé este video para mostrarles cómo crear un test de carrito de compras en Bugster usando solo texto plano. Menos de 60 segundos. El agente de IA entiende el flujo de su web, ejecuta los pasos y guarda el test sin que tengan que programar ni mantener scripts frágiles. Cero código. Prueben la plataforma hoy mismo con su propio sitio web y liberen a su equipo de las pruebas manuales. Link en los comentarios. Rápido.

  • Bugster reposted this

    Everyone says developers have "hair on fire" problems. I think that's wrong. Developers are problem solvers. That's literally the job. When something breaks, they fix it. When a process is slow, they script it. When a tool sucks, they build an internal one. That's what makes selling dev tools so hard. Your customer's default reaction to pain is to solve it themselves. But there are problems that keep showing up. Not because devs can't solve them, but because they shouldn't have to (or don't want). Here are the ones I heard the most after 120+ developer interviews: 1. Code review can't keep up. PRs pile up. The senior dev becomes the bottleneck. Everyone's waiting. Nobody's shipping. 2. Testing is still manual. The most mentioned problem in every interview. Teams shipping faster than ever, still testing like it's 2019. Click here, check that, hope nothing broke. Lucky for us at Bugster, this is still a huge pain. 3. Documentation gets outdated fast. Code moves faster than docs. Always has. Always will. The gap just keeps getting wider. 4. Requirements are unclear or change mid-feature. The spec says one thing Monday, another thing Wednesday. You build the feature, it's wrong. Not because of your code, because the target moved. The thing these problems have in common is that that these are boring problems. Nobody wakes up excited to write test cases, update docs, or chase down a spec change. Nobody builds a career on reviewing PRs faster. Developers can solve them. They always can. But they don't want to. Devs will automate the interesting stuff all day. But the boring stuff? It just sits there. Getting worse. Sprint after sprint. That's the real "hair on fire" problem in dev teams. Not the hard problems. The boring ones that nobody wants to own.

    • No alternative text description for this image
  • Bugster reposted this

    The teams 10x-ing with AI don't have better models. They have a .md file. Over the past few weeks, I've been chatting with some of the best developers in Latin America. Folks working at LATAM startups and global companies alike. I wanted to understand: who's actually winning with AI coding tools, and who isn't? (Full report with all the insights drops next week) Here's the pattern: Devs who say "Claude/Cursor changed my life": 1. Have an agents.md or rules file documenting conventions 2. Say "look how we did it here" before asking for something new 3. Break tasks into small steps 4. Treat the AI like a junior dev who needs context Devs who say "I tried it, wasn't convinced": 1. Throw "build me this feature" and expect magic 2. Never configured rules or context 3. Stayed at autocomplete level 4. Tried it 6 months ago, didn't work, never came back One dev told me: "What used to take 2 months, I did in 4 days. But I had to write a solid README first." Another: "My teammates don't use it because they 'don't trust it.' I close 3x more tickets than them." The AI isn't bad. Your onboarding to the AI is bad. 30 min setting up context > months complaining about hallucinations.

    • No alternative text description for this image
  • Bugster reposted this

    Wrapping Up 2025: The Year of Agents They called it "the year of agents." They were "absolutely" right. What we saw at Bugster: Agent-based testing went from experiment to production standard. 3-person teams now ship with startup velocity and enterprise-level confidence. A year ago, this was impossible. Testing was either: Too expensive (hire QA team) Too slow (sacrifice velocity) Too complex (engineering bottleneck) Agents solved all three. The trade-off we learned: Agent-Based: Fast to create. Adapts to changes. Anyone can write them. But: non-deterministic, slower execution, higher cost per run. Script-Based: Deterministic. Fast. Audit-friendly. But: 60% maintenance overhead, needs specialists, breaks constantly. There's no "winner." Velocity-constrained teams → Agents Compliance-heavy teams → Scripts Different problems. Different tools. 2026 question: Are you picking the right approach for your constraint?

    • No alternative text description for this image
  • Bugster reposted this

    Catching bugs is half the job. The other half is fixing them fast. Now when Bugster finds an issue, you can click "Fix in Cursor" and jump straight to the code. No context switching. No copy-pasting error messages. See the bug, click, fix, keep shipping. Took 5 minutes to build. Small quality-of-life improvement that saves time on every failure.

  • The testing workflow developers actually wanted: → Ask questions in natural language → Generate tests on the fly → Run everything from your IDE Interactive Shell is here 🔥

    Claude Code for testing. Bugster Launch Week – Day 4: Interactive Shell Today we’re releasing our new interactive CLI. Ask Bugster to test a flow, save it, generate more tests, run suites, or explore new features with destructive agents, all inside your IDE.

Similar pages

Browse jobs

Funding

Bugster 3 total rounds

Last Round

Seed

US$ 300.0K

Investors

500 Global
See more info on crunchbase