On this page
If you want a QA.tech alternative that reads what your app did inside the page (requests, state, console) and runs in your coding agent's loop, Reticle is built for that. If you want agents that test every pull request against a preview from outside, on web and mobile, with no code access, QA.tech is the stronger choice.
What QA.tech does
QA.tech calls its product "Verification agents for teams that ship fast" (qa.tech). You connect GitHub, and its agents pick up each pull request that has a preview environment, run tests against the live app, and post results with screenshots and explanations. You teach journeys in plain English; tests run in QA.tech's cloud and do not need access to your code.
It has an MCP server for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Continue and Linear Agent (docs), and a CLI that can expose a local server. It is not open source, and pricing is not public: every plan says "Talk to us" (pricing, checked 2026-10-25).
What Reticle does
Reticle checks an AI coding agent's change from inside the running web app and returns a verdict with evidence. It reads the network calls, the application state and the console, and on React and Svelte it names the file:line to fix.
Your agent calls it through MCP while it works. Flows it drives are saved and replay deterministically, with no model in the loop. The SDK is open source (Apache-2.0) and runs on your machine; the hosted platform runs the same checks on previews and pull requests.
QA.tech vs Reticle at a glance
| QA.tech | Reticle | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it looks | Outside the app, through the browser | Inside the app (SDK), plus a driven browser |
| When it runs | On each PR with a preview, in its cloud | In the agent's session, in CI, or on the hosted platform |
| What a check reads | What the page shows, with screenshots | Network count, app state, console and DOM after each step |
| Code access needed | No | No for network, console, DOM; SDK in your build for state and file:line |
| Mobile | Yes | Web only |
| Re-running | Agent re-runs the journey | Deterministic replay, no model in the loop |
| Points to the fix | The failing screen and explanation | The failing request or state, and file:line on React and Svelte |
| Open source | No | SDK Apache-2.0; server FSL-1.1 |
| Pricing | Not public | Start free, no card; open-source SDK free |
Where QA.tech is the better choice
- You want nothing in your code. QA.tech needs no code access. Reticle can drive a site without its SDK, but app state and file:line need it in your build.
- You need mobile as well as web. QA.tech covers both; Reticle verifies web apps.
- You want a mature pull-request workflow with exploratory agents posting screenshots and explanations on every PR.
- You want a vendor to own the testing. Journeys are taught in plain English and run in its cloud.
Where Reticle is the better choice
- The bug does not show on screen. A charge request sent twice, a write that never persists, a store that disagrees with the total. Screenshots of those look correct; Reticle reads the requests and state, so the step fails.
- You want the fix located. The verdict names the request or state and, on React and Svelte, the source line, so the agent edits the right file.
- You want deterministic, cheap re-runs. Eight replays of a saved flow gave one verdict, and re-verifying four flows costs about 480 tokens, about 251 times less than a model re-driving them.
- You want to see the price and run it yourself. The SDK is open source and local, and the platform starts free.
On 88 seeded bugs, Reticle caught 85 with no false alarms, with one genuine miss (scorecard).
Can you use both?
Yes. QA.tech can test each pull request from the user's side, while Reticle is the inside check your agent runs before the pull request exists. The argument for reading behaviour rather than screens is in what AI verification is. Related: the TestSprite alternative and all alternatives.
Try Reticle in five minutes
Paste one line to your coding agent, and it installs and wires the SDK in your app:
Follow https://raw.githubusercontent.com/reticlehq/reticle/main/SKILL.md
Or run npx @reticlehq/core init yourself. The README has the details.
FAQ
What is the best alternative to QA.tech?
The best alternative to QA.tech depends on where you want the check. For verification inside your own web app that your coding agent runs, reading network, state and console, Reticle fits. For hand-written cross-browser tests, Playwright fits. For another outside-in agent that tests pull requests, look at other AI QA services.
Is QA.tech open source?
No, QA.tech is not open source, and its pricing is not public: every plan asks you to talk to sales. Reticle's in-app SDK is open source under Apache-2.0 and runs locally, its server is source-available under FSL-1.1, and the hosted platform has a free start with no card.
How is Reticle different from QA.tech?
Reticle is different from QA.tech in where it looks. QA.tech's agents test a preview from outside and report what the screens showed. Reticle runs inside the app, checks the requests, state and console after each step, and replays saved flows with no model in the loop, so re-runs are deterministic.
Does Reticle test pull requests like QA.tech?
Yes, Reticle can test pull requests. The hosted platform runs the same checks on previews and pull requests, and in CI npx @reticlehq/server verify replays saved flows and fails the build on a broken one. Its main use, though, is earlier: inside the agent's session, before the pull request is opened.
Why Reticle
Your agent says it works. Reticle checks.
- Checks each change inside the running app: network, state and console, not a screenshot.
- Returns a pass or fail with the evidence and the file:line to fix.
- Open-source SDK on your machine, or the platform on every preview and PR.
No credit card required.