sakioriYour tests break when the UI or flow changes. Sakiori mends them, and shows every stitch.
Record a flow once in Chrome, or write it in plain English. When a label, layout, step order or page changes, Sakiori finds the right element, fixes the step and puts the change in front of you to confirm, with recorded evidence beside today’s run. When something is actually broken, it says so, with the likely cause.
Built for manual QA teams. No test code to write or maintain.
Button moved into form footer and renamed.
Every UI or flow tweak breaks your test suite. Then someone spends a week fixing it.
Tests are written against the flow as it was. “New item” becomes “Add item”, a form gets reordered, a button moves into a menu. Nothing is broken, but half the suite goes red. So teams repair tests that were never wrong, or stop trusting automation and click through by hand.
Brittle
A renamed button or a reordered step fails the test, even though the feature works.
Noisy
Red runs don’t tell you whether it’s a bug or just a UI or flow change.
Opaque
Tools that “auto-fix” don’t show what they changed, so nobody trusts them. A test healed onto the wrong button is worse than one that failed: it passes while testing the wrong thing.
Record once. Run anywhere. Review what changed.
Three steps. The third is the product.
Click through once
Use the Recorder for Chrome, or type the steps in plain English. Sakiori performs them once to learn the page.
Click New item Enter "Desk Lamp {{unique}}" in Name Choose "Hardware" in Category Click Create
Across environments
Staging, new builds, redesigns. It looks where the element was, then by name, then by what it does, and continues only when confident.
where it was? no named 'New item'? no submits the form? yes, 99%
Confirm each stitch
Recorded vs now, element outlined on both. One keystroke updates the test for good. Unsure? It stops and shows its best guess.
New item → Add item [A] accept [J/K] next
Self-healing you can see.
If you can describe it, you can test it. If Sakiori changes it, you can see why.
Shows its working
Lists every lookup in plain words, and understands what an element does: the field labelled Price, the button that submits the form. So “Create” can become “Save” and the test still clicks the right thing.
Never heals silently
Repairs on its own only when it’s confident. Below that, the run stops for review with screenshots and its best guess. Your answer teaches the next run.
Red doesn’t just mean red
Every failure gets a likely cause (real bug, UI change, timing, test data or environment) with the evidence behind it. Unclear cases are marked “needs your call”.
Plain English, or just record it
Type steps the way you’d write a test case, with a live preview, or click through once in Chrome. Passwords are masked as they’re typed.
Why this matters now.
Software ships faster than testers can click. Testing matters as much as ever, so the repetition has to go.
Change is constant
Teams ship UI and flow changes every day, faster with AI-assisted development. Manual regression can’t keep pace without growing headcount.
The stakes stay high
Fast releases don’t lower the bar. Skipping regression to save time trades speed for silent breakage.
Repetition is the waste
Your testers already know what to check. Sakiori takes the repeat clicking off their plate, so their hours go to judgment: exploring edge cases, confirming repairs, calling real bugs.
Made for the people who actually test the product.
Manual QA testers
Automate the flows you already click through every release, without learning a test framework.
QA leads
See which tests are flaky, which environments are behind, and whether the automation’s decisions can be trusted.
Teams shipping redesigns
Keep the regression suite green through a UI refresh instead of rewriting it.
Why it’s different.
| Question | Hand-written test scripts | Typical record-and-replay | Sakiori |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who writes tests | Engineers | Anyone | Anyone, by recording or in plain English |
| When a button is renamed or a step moves | Test fails, someone edits code | Test fails, re-record | Repaired, and shown to you to confirm |
| When it isn’t sure | n/a | n/a | Stops and asks, with screenshots |
| When something fails | A stack trace | “Element not found” | A likely cause: bug, UI change, timing, data or environment |
| What changed and why | Read the diff | Unknown | Every lookup, every choice, every confidence level |
Automation you can audit.
You stay in charge
Repairs below the confidence bar never apply on their own, and every repair can be confirmed or rejected.
Nothing hidden
Every automatic decision is recorded with what it considered and how sure it was.
Secrets stay secret
Password fields are masked while recording and filled in from your settings at run time.
Your feedback counts
Every heal you confirm or correct is recorded and feeds the accuracy figures in Insights.
Questions, answered.
Do I need to know how to code?
No. Record a flow in Chrome or write the steps in plain English.
What happens when my app’s UI or flow changes?
Sakiori looks for each element where it was recorded, then by its name and label, and then by what it does on the page, and checks that the step still produces what the recording saw happen. If it’s confident, it repairs the step and asks you to confirm. If it isn’t, it stops and shows you its best guess.
Can it hide a real bug by “healing” around it?
That’s what it’s designed to avoid. It continues only when the step also produces what the recording saw happen, such as “Item created” appearing. A dead button or a server error stops the run and is reported with a likely cause.
Can I run the same tests on different environments?
Yes. Add each environment once (Staging, a feature build, a redesign) and run tests or whole suites on several at once.
Stop fixing tests that were never wrong.
Record your first flow in a couple of minutes. The next time the UI or flow changes, see what Sakiori repairs, and how it shows you.