co-founder noqa.ai – Agentic QA automation for mobile apps

Barcelona
Pinned Tweet
Stop manually testing your app before every release We built agentic QA that just works: - No code, no locators, no SDK. - Supports iOS and Android, any framework (Native, React Native, Flutter). - Works with local and cloud real devices. Install the Mac app, plug in your phone, watch agents do the work Wanna try? Comment "INTERESTED" and I'll send you free early access
12
24
4,423
Locators and AI vision are not fighting for the same job. Teams debate which one is better as if one tool must win. But this is not a battle of performance. It is a boundary of coverage. Locators lookup elements in milliseconds on stable trees. Where your UI structure is predictable, locators work fine. Keep them. Vision takes over where trees do not exist: Unity games, canvas UIs, Apple Pay popups, and OS system alerts. A locator simply cannot query what is not in the DOM. Strong teams do not pick a camp. They keep locators for standard views and use vision to cover the screens that used to be strictly manual. How much of your mobile app is still tested manually simply because traditional locators cannot read those screens?
7
1
387
On backend & web, AI agents finish the job. On mobile, they were stuck behind the touch screen. The noqa CLI gives them hands. Now Cursor and Claude Code can connect a real device, read the screen, and drive it by plain-English descriptions instead of flaky selectors. The agent that built your screen can finally verify if it actually works. Grab it in the noqa macOS app: Settings → Tools
3
3
547
If anyone needs real iOS/Android devices or Android emulators in your Claude code – use github.com/noqa-ai/noqa
Claude Code on desktop now works with the iOS simulator. Build and run your iOS app, and the simulator opens in a panel right next to your conversation. Available today in public beta.
1
1
8
1,323
Reading a screen can cost your agent 5,600 tokens. Or 800. That's the full accessibility tree vs noqa's cleaned one. Same screen, only the elements that matter. 7x lighter. Every single read. Free CLI, link below.
5
1
2
1,213
Simulators lie. In-app purchases behave differently, real hardware performs differently. Your coding agent should be testing on the real thing, from the terminal.
1
475
Your coding agent writes the feature in minutes. Then you spend an hour wiring it to a real device just to see if it works. Something is off with that loop.
1
1
558
Vibe coders: which plan are you *actually* on right now? - Claude $20 - Claude $100 - Claude $200 - Codex $20 - Codex $200 - Something else — be real
1
1
489
Your coding agent can build the app. It still can't test it on a real device. So we built a CLI for noqa. Your agent drives a real device straight from the terminal. • Plain commands in, screenshots out • Real devices, not just simulators • Point at an element, noqa taps it Try it now.
1
1
384
I keep seeing the same thing in Flutter teams: pre-release testing becomes the bottleneck. Flutter apps are testable, but the usual automation path is still harder than it should be because the UI is rendered differently from native apps. That's what makes pre-release testing slower and more manual than most teams want. That's the problem we wanted to solve with our visual agent. It doesn't care about the element tree - it looks at the screenshot and acts on what it sees. That means there's no need to add accessibility IDs or other test-specific setup. You just describe what you want in plain English, and it does the rest.
1
296
Noticed a pattern: new agentic mobile QA tools are launching simulator-only. Surprised me - every team we've talked to building noqa says they need real devices. Not because simulators are useless, but the scary pre-release stuff doesn't show up there. IAPs behave differently. Real hardware performance differs. Building noqa, we had to choose: simulators only, or real devices too? We went with both. Simulators for fast dev feedback. Real devices before release, when you need to know things actually work.
1
219
Shipping a broken paywall is the most expensive bug in mobile The scariest bug you can ship isn't a crash. It's a broken purchase flow that nobody notices for days - while revenue bleeds out quietly, ad campaigns keep spending, and algorithms train themselves on data from users who were trying to buy but couldn't. Most teams handle it the same way - manual testing before every release. One paywall is manageable, but they multiply - web funnels, subscription tiers, separate flows for different segments. It quietly becomes one of the bigger parts of the regression cycle. We built noqa to automate exactly this. An agent that runs through purchase flows on its own - paywalls, system dialogs, subscription confirmations. You describe the goal in plain English, it does the rest. The kind of thing that lets you ship on Friday without checking Slack all weekend. Here's what it looks like in practice ↓
196
I built a QA tool that runs tests on real devices for any mobile framework. No code, no locators, no SDK. Install the Mac app, plug in your phone, watch agents do the work
1
1
6
441
We’re building noqa.ai specifically to address the last bottleneck in mobile app development: testing. Now you can run agents to test your app on real devices.
I really love building iPhone apps in Codex. Codex can design the screens, write the Swift code with GPT-5.5, run the app in Simulator without opening Xcode, and even click around with computer use to test it!
1
215
What do you use to test your mobile app? - Manual testing - XCUITest - Appium - Something else?
1
104
Build your app. Test it. Ship with confidence. Iterate fast. Let the data guide you. Go dominate your market.
102