Absolutely, Vishva! I love that "QX Engineer" term—it perfectly captures the shift from 'writing scripts' to 'designing quality.' You're 100% right: no matter how good the orchestration is, the "edge-case instinct" is purely human. Tooling can handle the repetitive execution, but it's that domain context and culture that prevent the system from just efficiently running the wrong tests. It’s all about empowering the engineer to focus on the high-level strategy rather than getting bogged down in the mechanics. Appreciate you adding that layer to the discussion!

Fully agree. As Michael Bodnarchuk recently pointed out, the real challenge isn't just generating code, but ensuring its maintainability. I’ve been looking into how ai in software testing can actually solve this by focusing on orchestration rather than just raw script generation. It’s a game-changer for long-term stability: https://testomat.io/blog/ai-in-software-testing/

Spot on. The 'AI as a feature' phase is definitely hitting a ceiling. I’ve been following the same shift in the QA world recently. Most legacy tools are just adding a GPT-wrapper to 'generate a test case,' which is just a feature. But the real winners are those moving toward AI-native orchestration—where the system doesn't just write a script but autonomously manages the execution layer and heals itself. I was just reading a deep dive on how ai in software testing https://testomat.io/blog/ai-in-software-testing/ is moving toward this 'agentic' workflow where the product IS the automation engine, not just a UI with a chatbot. It's exactly as Archit said above: the mental model shift from 'AI as a feature' to 'AI as architecture' is the real unlock for ROI.