Log in Generate My Test Cases →
Home Capabilities Software Test Cases
Software Test Cases

Turn your requirements into test cases
you can actually run.

Start with what you already have — a spec, a user story, an API doc, or the code itself. WeSimplifAI writes the test cases from what's actually there, and tells you plainly when something can't be tested yet.

What are you testing?
Application Feature User journey API or service Source code A recent change
Evidence attached
📄 spec.pdf — 18 pages
The problem

You have the spec. Writing every case from it is where the gaps hide.

You already have the spec, the ticket, or the code. Writing every test case from it by hand is slow and easy to leave gaps in. Pasting it into a general chat tool is fast — but nothing stops it from confidently describing an "Expected Result" for behavior your spec never actually specified, and that gap doesn't show up until someone trusts a test case that was never real.

The outcome

A structured, evidence-traceable document — not a pile of guesses.

Every claim traces back to what you actually provided, and anything that can't be verified from your evidence is marked "Not Testable" instead of guessed at.

Objective & Scope Evidence Used Test Approach Test Cases Coverage Summary Coverage Gaps Ambiguities & Unknowns Traceability Verification Notes
How it works

Recognition → Evidence → Plan → Build → Verify

1
Recognition
You tell WeSimplifAI what you're testing and attach the real document, spec, or code behind it.
2
Evidence
WeSimplifAI proposes a test brief and section outline grounded in what you attached.
3
Plan
The section outline and coverage approach are shown before generation begins.
4
Build
Test cases are built in front of you, checking every symbol claim against your evidence.
5
Verify
A distinct testability check runs, and a screening pass checks for anything sensitive before it's ever shown back to you.
No blank prompt to write

Pick what you're testing. Then attach the real thing.

What are you testing? Pick from Application, Feature, User journey, API or service, Source code, A recent change, or Something else. Optionally narrow it — Unit, Integration, API, End-to-end, Functional, Regression, Security, or Not sure — and add anything specific you want covered. WeSimplifAI won't generate test cases from a description alone — real evidence is what it grounds every claim in, so it asks for the document before it asks you to write anything.

Narrow it (optional)
API Unit Integration End-to-end Regression Not sure
Evidence required for test generation
Attach the spec, requirements doc, API definition, or code you're testing. Generation stays disabled until real evidence is attached.
Drop a file, or paste a link to the document
What's distinct here

Two separate checks before you ever see a test case.

First, a grounding check — does the evidence you attached actually contain what this test case claims it does. Second, a distinct testability check — is the expected result specific enough to be a real pass/fail test, or is it a plausible-sounding restatement of something your evidence only implies. A separate, deterministic pass also screens for anything sensitive in your evidence — credentials, tokens, keys — before it's ever echoed back into a test case.

Grounding Check

Catches a symbol or claim your evidence never actually contains — a fabricated method name, field, or behavior.

Ungrounded claim rejected
Testability Gate

Catches an Expected Result that's plausible-sounding but not actually specific enough to be a pass/fail test.

Not Testable — reason stated
Example outputs

A real, publicly showable example is on its way.

The strongest evidence this capability has is a real production run against a client's confidential 18-page SDK integration guide — it can't be shown here because the source is confidential, not because it doesn't exist. A new, intentionally non-confidential example is being generated specifically to show here.

A real example test-case document is coming soon.
We'd rather show you a real one than a fabricated one.
Proof

This isn't a first run.

The generation, grounding, and testability discipline described above was built through ten rounds of real production QA against actual evidence — including catching and fixing a genuine credential leak (a real token reproduced verbatim from source evidence into a test case, found, fixed, and re-verified against the identical evidence a third time) and a severe truncation bug found only when tested against a real 18-page document, not a small fixture.

The no-evidence gate is one piece of this that's fully confirmed in production today: the founder ran the real no-evidence click-through against the live capability and confirmed it correctly refuses to generate without a real document attached — describable and citable here without exposing any confidential content, since it's a statement about the absence of evidence, not its contents.

A captured, visible demonstration of the grounding and Testability Gate behavior — something a visitor could watch or click through themselves — doesn't exist publicly yet. That behavior is real and has been verified internally and repeatedly; it just isn't recorded anywhere public today.

How this is different

We don't compete on being faster than a chat tool.

vs. general chat tools

A general chat tool will happily draft you a test case for almost anything you ask about — it just won't tell you when it's guessing. WeSimplifAI competes on refusing to guess, and saying so plainly when your evidence doesn't support a claim.

vs. test-management & execution platforms

We don't compete with tools like TestRail, Zephyr, or Xray. WeSimplifAI doesn't run, schedule, or track your tests — it produces the document you'd load into one of those.

vs. code-level test-autogeneration tools

We don't compete with tools that write compiled test code from source. The output here is a structured, reviewable document for a QA process, not test code to check in.

Now use it

The test cases are written. Now put them where your team actually works.

A test-case document doesn't test anything sitting in a downloads folder either. Here's how it's meant to be used.

1. Load it into your real test-management tool — TestRail, Zephyr, Xray, or wherever your team already tracks execution; WeSimplifAI produces the document, it doesn't run or schedule tests.
2. Hand it directly to the reviewer or engineer who asked for coverage on this spec.
3. Spec or code changed? Generate again from the new evidence — there's no saved profile to hand-edit, each run grounds itself in what you attach that time.
4. Treat a "Not Testable" or Coverage Gap entry as a real signal — get better evidence or consciously accept the gap, don't quietly fill it in yourself.
5. Keep the Traceability section attached to whatever record your team keeps for audits or "was this actually tested" questions later.
FAQ

Common questions

Will it invent test cases for behavior my spec doesn't actually describe?
No. Every symbol claim is checked against the evidence you attach, and a separate check specifically catches claims that are quoted correctly but not actually specific enough to be tested — those get marked Not Testable with what's missing named, not filled in with a guess.
What if there's a secret or API key in the document I attach?
There's a deterministic redaction pass plus a rule against reproducing sensitive values, added after a real leaked-credential case was found, fixed, and independently re-verified against the same evidence. This is real and verified internally; no public demonstration of it exists yet, since the verifying document can't be shown.
Do I need to attach a real document, or can I just describe what I'm testing?
A real document is required. WeSimplifAI blocks generation with zero evidence attached, on purpose — the chips get your intent recognized quickly, but nothing gets generated from a description alone.
Is this accurate 100% of the time?
No, and we'd rather say so than oversell it. The grounding check has a known limitation: it can still flag standard technical terms (for example, common SDK method names or manifest attributes) as "ungrounded" even when they're legitimate, ordinary vocabulary rather than a fabricated symbol. This is a named, deferred precision issue, not a generation-safety gap — the safety-critical behaviors (no invented symbols presented as evidence-backed, no reproduced secrets, no confident guessing on untestable claims) are the ones that have been repeatedly verified.
Can I get real test code, not just a document?
No — output is a structured test-case document (Objective, Approach, individual Test Cases, Coverage, Traceability), not compiled test code. That's a deliberate scope boundary, not a current limitation waiting to be lifted.
Is it free?
Generation is free and downloads as markdown. A formatted HTML export is a Pro feature.

Turn your requirements into test cases you can actually run.

Attach the spec, the API doc, or the code. WeSimplifAI grounds every case in what's actually there.