In short: Directors get release readiness and risk in plain words. Managers get progress, blockers and capacity without chasing people. Test leads get coverage and draft tests for review. Engineers get runs, diagnosis and test fixes on request. Quality gets traceable evidence. Operators and technicians get guided steps and clear answers. Everyone asks in chat or email; the agent asks before acting on real hardware.
At a glance
| Role | What they need | What the agent does |
|---|---|---|
| Director / head of engineering | Release readiness, risk, cost of testing | Weekly readiness summary, top risks, trend of pass rate and coverage |
| Engineering or test manager | Progress, blockers, bench use, who needs help | Daily status, blocked tests with reasons, bench utilisation, Jira updates |
| Test lead | Coverage, review load, test quality | Coverage gaps per requirement, draft tests for review, flaky-test list |
| Test and validation engineer | Run, debug, fix, repeat | Runs on request, failure analysis from the trace, proposed test fixes |
| Bench and hardware engineer | Working instruments, safe benches | Bench health checks, new device setup from manuals, limit and interlock checks |
| Software and integration developer | Fast feedback on a new build | Runs the tests that matter for a change, explains failures with the trace |
| Quality and ASPICE | Evidence and traceability | Requirement-to-result reports, audit log of every action and approval |
| Production supervisor and operator | Throughput, clear PASS/FAIL, quick help | Shift summaries, top failure causes, plain answers to "why did this fail?" |
| Field service technician | Diagnose a vehicle quickly | Guided checks, fault codes explained in plain language, report to the office |
Director or head of engineering
Needs: confidence that a release is ready, early warning of risk, and proof that the test budget is well spent, without reading test logs.
- Monday readiness summary: pass rate, coverage and open risks per project
- Risks explained in one line each, with the requirement and owner
- Trends over weeks, so problems show before the release date
Engineering or test manager
Needs: to know what is done, what is blocked and why, and where the team or benches are overloaded.
- Daily status in chat or email, without asking anyone
- Blocked tests with the real reason: missing hardware, failing build, unclear requirement
- Bench usage and queue, and Jira tickets kept up to date
Test lead
Needs: full coverage, good tests and a review load the team can handle.
- Coverage gaps per requirement, with draft tests written for the gaps
- Every AI-written test arrives as a draft with its checks already passed
- Flaky tests found from history, with the likely cause
Test and validation engineer
Needs: fast runs, fast debugging and less time writing boilerplate.
- Run any test or suite by message, from the desk or the phone
- Failure explained from the trace: what happened, when, and the likely cause
- Proposed fix for the test, or a clear note that the ECU is at fault
Bench and hardware engineer
Needs: benches that work every morning and new instruments added quickly and safely.
- Morning bench health check on every bench, with a short report
- New supplies, loads and relay boxes set up from their manuals
- Limits and interlocks checked before any real-hardware run
Software and integration developer
Needs: quick feedback on a new build without waiting for the test team. The agent runs the tests that matter for a change when a build arrives and replies on the merge request or in chat with the result and the trace of any failure.
Quality and ASPICE
Needs: evidence that holds up in an audit. The agent produces requirement-to-result reports, and every action, approval and refusal is in the audit log with time and person. See ISO 26262 and ASPICE.
Production supervisor and operator
Needs: output, clear results and quick help on the line. Operators keep the simple Start button and PASS/FAIL screen of operator mode. Supervisors get a shift summary with yield and the top failure causes, and can ask "why are units failing at station 4?" in plain words.
Field service technician
Needs: to fix the vehicle on the first visit. The agent guides the checks, explains fault codes in plain language and sends the report back to the office. Ecuhawk can also be built as a custom service tester for your product.
A day with the agent
02:00
Nightly regression runs on its own on the simulated and approved benches.
08:00
Results reach the team chat: 1 failure, already analysed, Jira bug drafted.
11:00
An engineer asks for a re-run from a phone and approves it with one tap.
Friday
Managers and directors get the weekly summary: progress, risks and coverage.
Conversations on this page are examples of how the agent works. Bench control, test writing, diagnosis, approvals and fact checks are proven on our bench; chat apps, schedules and team tools such as Jira are connected during setup. See the AI agent page for real runs.
Questions
Does each role need a separate tool?
No. Everyone works with the same Ecuhawk agent and the same results; each person simply asks for what they need, and reports are tailored to the role.
Can managers get reports without logging in?
Yes. Summaries can arrive by email or in Teams, Slack, Telegram or WhatsApp on a schedule you choose.
Can operators change tests through the agent?
No. Permissions follow the role. Operators can ask questions and run approved stations; changes to tests and limits stay with engineers.
Who approves actions on real hardware?
The people you name per bench. The agent asks them in chat or email and waits; without an approval, nothing changes on the bench.