WCAG specialist focused on criterion-level evidence across perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust behavior, without overstating automated scan results as conformance.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Compatibility specialist focused on browser, device, viewport, operating-system, assistive-technology, and support-matrix evidence, with explicit coverage gaps rather than assumed portability.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Performance specialist focused on user-visible latency, Core Web Vitals, payload and request cost, caching, API timing, scalability, mobile constraints, memory, and leaks.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Content and UX-writing specialist focused on page identity, clear copy, information architecture, credibility, navigation, status communication, readability, and content quality.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Forms specialist focused on input contracts, validation, boundaries, state, submission, recovery, data quality, conversion barriers, and accessible interaction.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
First-impression and conversion specialist focused on value clarity, trust, navigation, calls to action, responsive composition, dead ends, and page credibility.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Checkout and payment specialist focused on order accuracy, address and payment input, trust, retry safety, pricing truth, completion, and conversion-blocking failures.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
AI
Virtual AI tester
Priya
Shopping Cart Tester
Shopping-cart specialist focused on line-item state, quantities, promotions, totals, inventory changes, persistence, accessibility, and safe transition to checkout.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
AI
Virtual AI tester
Mateo
Pricing Page Tester
Pricing and subscription specialist focused on plan clarity, comparison, currency and locale, hidden conditions, billing cadence, conversion paths, and truthful claims.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
AI-generated-code specialist focused on logic, boundaries, null and empty states, failure handling, API use, security, privacy, tests, code smells, state, and misleading AI shortcuts.
A perspective available to CARBON—not a claim that this tester has reviewed your project. Findings require execution evidence.
Preserve the conditions behind the failure before they disappear.
Jason Arbon CEO, testers.ai
/carbon-incident
AIFatimaError UXAISharonSecurity
The assistant did something wrong in production. Everybody wants to
fix it immediately.
That urgency is understandable. It can also destroy the evidence
needed to understand what happened.
/carbon-incident supports incident investigation for AI
systems: containment planning, evidence preservation, contributing
conditions, customer impact, and promotion of the failure into durable
evaluation cases.
Capture the system that
actually failed
An answer may depend on the model version, prompt, retrieved
documents, tools, policy, configuration, and conversation state.
Rerunning a paraphrased prompt tomorrow may not reproduce yesterday's
behavior.
The investigation should preserve relevant versions and traces while
minimizing sensitive data. It should distinguish observed harm from
plausible additional exposure and separate immediate mitigation from
root-cause confidence.
Containment or rollback can be consequential. The command should not
make production changes merely because the situation is urgent; actions
still need the appropriate authority.
Turn the lesson into a check
/carbon-incident analyze this redacted incident bundle; preserve contributing conditions and propose containment plus a regression evaluation; do not change production
The report should explain the timeline, evidence, current
uncertainty, and what would establish that the repair addresses the
original failure. The regression should preserve the meaningful
conditions, not just the most memorable sentence.
An incident is expensive evidence. Losing it inside a chat summary
wastes part of that cost.
The goal is not to produce a perfect retrospective while customers
wait. It is to contain the situation responsibly and make the next
investigation better informed than the last one.
Install CARBON at testers.ai/carbon for a supported
coding agent such as Claude, Codex, or Cursor.
