Prove your agents
before production does.
Boards and customers remember what broke in the wild. Strong agent releases need someone who owns what “works” means, how you prove it, and what happens when the model or prompt changes next week.
32+ years of enterprise QA, applied to agents and LLM-backed systems. We do not expect you to become a tester first. The Test practice is the lane where that shows up: clear criteria, evidence you can show, regression discipline, training when your people need a shared language, and embedded testers when release risk is the job. Same firm as your strategy and build work; this is where quality becomes defensible.
Years in enterprise QA
ASTQB-accredited providers in the US
Testers certified worldwide
Everyone is shipping agents. Few can prove they hold up. Strong releases need clear criteria, evidence, and owners who stay on it when models and prompts change.
We help you make releases defensible on your timeline. Implementation and integration are core to Rex Black; so is QA. The Test practice brings 32+ years of judgment to agents and LLM-backed systems: plain-language risk, criteria you can show a buyer, and the training and maturity work when your org needs structure, plus embedded testers when you need coverage, not just more headcount.
- Agents in production before anyone wrote down what “good” looks like
- Leadership asks “how do we know it's safe?” and nobody can show the receipts
- Buyers or auditors want a process, not heroics. When they look, the story falls apart
- Every model or prompt change is a new risk, with no regression story to catch what broke
We focus on what holds up in production: evidence you can show, maturity when you need structure, and work that matters instead of checkbox theater. More than 3 decades of enterprise QA inform how we do it.
Capabilities.
(4)Agents and AI products
You should be able to answer “what happens if this fails?” without improvising. 32+ years of QA judgment applied to agents: criteria, cases, evidence, regression, so LLM-backed systems meet the same bar as any release that can hurt you in public.
Embedded QA
ISTQB and CT-AI
TMMi and org maturity
Talk to us about
You need the right outcome, not the right QA vocabulary. Pick a door; we'll translate your situation into scope on the call. Same team, same bar.
Stop guessing if your agent is “good enough.” Criteria, runs, evidence, so you can stand behind the release.
Plain-English read on where testing breaks down and what to fix first, including formal paths when you need recognition.
Give your team one shared language (and AI-testing depth when you're shipping ML). Accredited programs.
Senior testers in your rhythm (cases, execution, automation) when headcount isn't the same as coverage.
When quality is already costing you
No QA degree required. These are the patterns we see when teams feel the squeeze before the headline.
It worked in the demo, not after deploy
Customers hit edge cases your team never scripted. Without a pass/fail story, every firefight looks like bad luck instead of a gap you can fix.
Releases keep breaking
Trust drops inside the org and with buyers. Audits get harder. Every hotfix trains the team to expect the next one.
Nobody can explain “how we know it's safe”
Leadership asks for confidence; engineering has opinions, not evidence. Sales and support get stuck defending what nobody measured.
Compliance or enterprise buyers want proof
Traceability, records, a grown-up process. Gaps show up when someone serious actually looks.
You can't scale testing by hiring alone
Headcount without structure means heroics and burnout, not a system that survives the next model update.
You shouldn't need to decode QA jargon to buy the work. Three phases: what we check, what we put in place, what we keep improving, so expectations stay obvious.
Assess. Build. Optimize.
Assess
2 to 3 weeks- +TMMi-aligned maturity and quality diagnostics
- +Process and systems map
- +Gaps, risks, prioritized report
Build
6 to 12 weeks- +ISTQB training (Foundation through Advanced; CT-AI where you test AI-based systems)
- +Test cases and embedded manual QA
- +Automation direction and tooling fit
- +Documentation for compliance when needed
Optimize
Ongoing- +Deeper certs and specializations
- +Agent and LLM evaluation with releases
- +Performance and load where needed
- +Governance and audit readiness
Also in scope
- Performance and load testing
- Compliance-oriented programs (SOC2, HIPAA, FDA-aligned where relevant)
- Automation strategy, CI integration, maintainable suites
- Process and governance redesign
“We've built quality programs for organizations where failure doesn't create a support ticket. It creates a headline.”
Start with an assessment if that fits.
Roughly two to three weeks. Plain-language gaps and priorities. No obligation to keep us on.