UiPath Test Suite Reviews

We use the solution for supply chain management use cases. We can do test automation on the UiPath process automation tool. We used it for logistics orders and distribution projects. We have different applications there. We automated 12 applications.

We've used the solution for SAP applications as well as Anaplan and Salesforce.

It helps with invoice processing and form filling. You can make a lot of manifest cases. A lot of customers were spending a lot of time clearing cases.UiPath can come in and automate a lot of the manual tasks. 

The document understanding is good.

It's helped free up staff time for other projects. For example, in billing scenarios on SAP. I implemented an automation. I designed it in just eight hours. In another vendor, it took 32 hours to design something. It was faster using UiPath. Our demo was very successful. We could lower the time for billing to four minutes, and eight seconds. The best part is that it can maintain data in one place which makes it faster than other tools.

We have been able to reduce maintenance. It was not so easy to maintain, and lately, it's gotten much easier with the object repository feature. Customers can maintain code very easily at this point. You don't need to touch the actual base code with UiPath. You can, for example, three different objects with one code. The base code remains the same even as the objects change. 

It's helped reduce the cost of testing. We don't need to, for example, maintain a separate database for UiPath solutions. You can maintain your raw test data and have everything, once again, in one place. You don't have to buy separate licenses. We don't need SQL and we don't have to go with Jira every time. We can make everything under one umbrella. With other automation tools, you often have to buy more than one license to have end-to-end capabilities. 

The product releases sometimes have issues. In the past, I have provided points, such as exporting to the external file and getting reporting in an Excel file. That cannot be done yet. 

I don't recommend UiPath for third-party tools. I don't see the value in that. There are, for example, still a lot of issues when integrating with Jira. There were just too many scenarios to integrate.

I've used the solution for about seven years.

The solution is absolutely stable. It's very stable and easy compared to other automation tools. It's very successful compared to other options. 

The solution can scale. There are a lot of other things to update. It can be quite difficult with Excel, SharePoint, and SQL. It can be difficult to connect with these compared to other automation tools. 

They provide very good support. They support the technology very well. 

Positive

I've also used Microsoft Power Platform. UiPath was much more stable. I've also worked with Automation Anywhere.

We have witnessed an ROI. Everything is in the cloud. It saves on power, execution, and maintenance. 

You don't need many developers to design your automation, and everything happens very fast. The development time is lower. You can get up and running quickly. It's easy to migrate your automation code if you need to. It's easy to do testing across different web apps as well. You only have a license cost, which may be high, yet the ROI is quickly visible.

For those that worry their testing is too complex for UiPath, I'd advise them that UiPath can actually do pretty much anything. It offers end-to-end capabilities where users have everything in one place. They can maintain data and code. The reporting is there. For complex testing, having everything in one place is very, very important. Having direct integration and reducing coding is key to simplifying everything. UiPath helps reduce time in creating testing and frameworks. It makes everything very easy. Data and summary reports are all right there. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I've worked on a variety of automation solutions and uiPath has been the best in my experience. While there still needs improvements in terms of streamlining external connectors, it works quite well.

We use it to automate processes. For example, we can filter or fetch data from an Excel sheet and put it into another file. We can also scrape the data and put it into an Excel sheet or PDF.

We can integrate with multiple technologies such as Java, Python, etc. We can also automate with the Power BI tool. It supports different types of integrations. We are able to integrate with Jira, ServiceNow, etc.

It makes automation easy. To automate with Python or Java, we have to write a lot of code, which is not the case with UiPath. It is very easy to use.

I like the AI Center and Document Understanding features. I also like its interface and the ability to code.

It is user-friendly. The coding part is also fine. They have a portal for learning UiPath. 

It is feature-rich. It has more features than other RPA tools.

It already has many features. No improvement is required currently. We are able to automate most tasks by using UiPath. Its interface is fine. However, its price is a bit high.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.

It is scalable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability.

We have 10 to 11 users working with UiPath.

We are also using other RPA tools such as Power Automate, Blue Prism, and Automation Anywhere. We use the latest technology to improve our automation.

We take the customer requirements and analyze them. Based on the requirements, we recommend the solution. We see whether what the client needs can be automated through UiPath or some other solution. Certain things cannot be automated through UiPath. Similarly, certain things cannot be automated through Blue Prism or Automation Anywhere.

With other RPA tools, no test suite is available, whereas with UiPath, you have UiPath Test Suite. With other RPA tools, you have to use Selenium or some other application for testing, whereas, with UiPath, you have UiPath Test Suite, so you can create your test cases.

It is deployed on the cloud. Its deployment is easy. It is not complex.

After we complete the development, we test it in our testing environment. After monitoring and ensuring that everything works fine, we move to the production environment. We create a ticket in ServiceNow with the change request and get approval from the higher authority for the move to the production environment. It takes us three to five days.

It requires some maintenance. 

Its price is a bit high. I would rate it an eight out of ten for pricing.

Most companies are using its licensed version. It has a lot of features such as Document Understanding, AI Center, etc. For simple automations, there is also a community version.

It is a very good solution. People can learn it easily. It is the best solution if you want to automate repetitive tasks and manual operations. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I worked on a project for a bank that involved mortgage facilities for leasing motor vehicles. Clients approach the bank for financing, providing details about their needs. The process is divided into groups, with each group handling specific tasks. I implemented UiPath test cases to simulate the process, including customer registration, bank response, mortgage eligibility, and more. These test cases are executed in a long-running fashion and are currently operational.

In UiPath Test Suite, we create test cases in Studio and then publish them to Orchestrator. The publishing process allows us to disable unnecessary test cases, reducing the overall project size. After publishing, test cases are organized into Test Suites in Orchestrator. These suites can be executed in batches, allowing for daily testing and monitoring.

The Test Suite manager in Orchestrator provides a dashboard with a pie chart showing test case success and failure rates. This tool helps analyze test results and identify areas for improvement. While the Test Suite manager is primarily for checking and inspection, it also allows for editing, reading, and running test cases.

By dividing large processes into smaller parts, UiPath Test Suite becomes a valuable tool for testing and quality assurance.

UiPath Test Suite has helped automate various applications, including Microsoft Office, web applications, Citrix environments, and PDF documents. I used Microsoft Office primarily for the bank to send and receive client emails. For web testing, I employed JavaScript-based web applications. For Citrix automation, I executed tasks like logging in, logging out, and navigating to Java-based applications within the Citrix environment. Additionally, I incorporated PDF automation into application loops. Beyond these, I utilized Microsoft Active Directory to retrieve recipient names, such as customer names, within the Citrix environment. This involved recalling and obtaining the customer retail ID in a loop.

If I create a process in RE Framework within UiPath, which is typically used for complex processes, I find it beneficial for large-scale applications, especially in banking. Previously used for smaller processes, RE Framework now excels at breaking down complex processes into stages. In UiPath Test Suite, we can easily move the steps from our RE Framework process into tasks or test cases. While the RE Framework is larger, it offers a structured approach, making it ideal for processes that require frequent updates due to market changes, which often occur in the banking domain.

The UiPath Test Suite Manager in Orchestrator provides a dedicated dashboard for tracking and analyzing process success rates. This eliminates the need for end users to contact developers or team leads for status updates. By accessing the dashboard through the Orchestrator tenant URL, users can easily view the success rate for their processes and identify any failed steps or exceptions. This saves time and facilitates long-term process reviews and performance analysis.

In my experience, when we work in the office, we utilize a Microsoft Azure dashboard if the company has the license to track incidents and tasks. Daily, we review these items on the dashboard. UiPath Test Suite is a valuable tool that allows us to pre-categorize and plan our work. For instance, a large project might be divided into three-month phases, with the first month dedicated to creating test cases. This structured approach helps streamline our daily tasks. Additionally, UiPath's reusable components can significantly reduce development time. While the Azure dashboard is essential for daily task management, UiPath Test Suite provides a more strategic overview, ensuring our efforts align with the project's timeline. This saves us 75 percent of the time.

UiPath Test Suite integrates seamlessly with other solutions like ServiceNow and Microsoft Azure. ServiceNow primarily handles incident management. While UI automation might not be ideal for end-users in this context, API integration provides a more effective solution. To integrate with ServiceNow, I used a dedicated API endpoint, which I received with credentials. I employed Postman as a manual step to verify the correct retrieval of API data. Unlike the UI-based details in ServiceNow, API integration directly accesses backend data. I also integrated with Microsoft Azure using API calls for most applications. Similarly, integrating UiPath Test Suite with AI and ML solutions often relies on API calls.

As a success metric, I'm unsure how to present this best. Each month, we report on test case execution. Given a specific number of test cases, we track the bot's execution time. If a test case takes longer than expected, we investigate ways to optimize it. This is a regular process. While I'm not directly involved in development, I understand that UiPath's default execution time is 30 seconds, but actual times may vary. By running tests repeatedly, we can determine the actual time and identify areas for improvement. We aim to reduce complexity by addressing technical, application, and business exceptions. When presenting to clients, we demonstrate how we've reduced test case execution time from, for example, ten seconds to five or even two seconds. This is a crucial indicator of our success.

We swiftly recognize the advantages of the UiPath Test Suite. If we're executing a business process in Orchestrator, similar to how we run Test Suite, the latter operates in sets. For example, considering mortgage as a process name would encompass ten test cases. Once we align this process with our modern folder and proceed to the test tools, aligning and running it ensures all test cases are grouped under a single test set. This allows for immediate results, minimizing the time required. It will depend on our coding approach and development methodology. UI-based processes might take longer, while background automation generally requires less time. Within half an hour, we can anticipate receiving the answer. In fact, for minimal processes, results can be obtained within seconds.

UiPath's data management features provide a convenient way to store and manage credentials, files, and data. Credentials are securely stored in the UiPath storage bucket and can be accessed by the orchestrator as needed. This eliminates the need for large-scale data storage solutions like OneDrive or Gmail Drive. Additionally, data management allows us to upload and store various file types, including Excel, text, and credential-based files. For output data, we can leverage the orchestrator queue to track and manage its status. While Excel and queues are commonly used, we can also store data in shared paths or as standard text files or credentials files. In summary, UiPath offers a cloud-based storage solution, along with queue management, to efficiently handle data storage and management within our automation processes.

Recently, I completed an automation project using RPA to create a coded workflow. I entered a prompt into UiPath Autopilot, which automatically generated all necessary tests in the studio as coded elements using AI. I then executed and tested these tests, significantly reducing the time required for manual processes. By becoming proficient in prompt engineering and refining our approach, we can streamline automation and achieve greater efficiency.

The Test Manager, the final stage of the UiPath Test Suite, is its most valuable feature. It allows users, even those with read-only access, to directly monitor the performance of test cases, including their success and failure rates. This is crucial for end-users and for showcasing the average success rate to stakeholders in board meetings. The Test Manager is essential for performing these tasks and processes efficiently.

UiPath Test Suite, a feature within Orchestrator, is a useful tool for testing automation processes. However, accessing the full functionality of the Test Suite manager, including the dashboard, requires a tenant license. This can be a barrier for users without technical expertise.

While the community version offers free features like document understanding API calls, the Test Suite also provides limited free access to user community support. Still, access should be expanded as it can be crucial for learning and understanding the tool.

Regarding framework comparison, the RE framework in UiPath offers a structured template for process automation, including exception handling. However, the Test Suite framework needs similar exception-handling capabilities. This can require additional customization for effective application handling.

I have been using UiPath Test Suite for over two years.

UiPath Test Suite's stability is rated seven out of ten due to occasional performance issues in the cloud. While test cases created in the studio function well, deployment to the cloud can sometimes result in slow UiPath server responses or application loading problems. This can hinder immediate monitoring of success and failure rates, requiring manual refreshes and causing delays. Although maintenance is frequently performed, these issues can arise at any time, leading to a lower stability rating.

Several key differences emerge when comparing Selenium, UiPath Test Suite, Power Automate, and Automation Anywhere. While UiPath Test Suite provides a comprehensive framework with features like exception handling, RE framework, and try-catch blocks, Power Automate offers a more fundamental approach with limited templates. Automation Anywhere also lacks a desktop application and focuses solely on cloud-based automation. UiPath's orchestrator functionality and cloud-based Studio with machine learning capabilities also set it apart from the others. Ultimately, UiPath's broader feature set and versatility make it a more powerful tool for automation compared to its competitors.

The deployment process is straightforward. The UiPath documentation website offers detailed instructions on how to use the UiPath Test Suite. All features and steps are clearly outlined on this website. If we have the necessary license, we can review the steps and follow the team's guidance.

Configuring UiPath Test Suite typically takes one to two hours, depending on the developer's experience. As I am familiar with the setup process, I anticipate it will be quick. I will use a template, create a test case, publish it to the orchestrator, verify and align the process, review the test case, execute it, and monitor its progress. While this is a simple task, understanding the steps is crucial. Fortunately, the UiPath documentation provides valuable guidance.

The UiPath license portal provides a dedicated space for managing licenses. All licenses originate from FlexTitle. For each license, such as those in the Test Suite or Action Center, there is a specific API call or number indicating the license count. Compared to other vendors, UiPath is known for its higher cost. However, this investment grants organizations a comprehensive environment for implementation. UiPath offers cloud and desktop features that are not currently available with competitors like Automation Anywhere or Power Automate. While these competitors may expand their offerings in the future, UiPath currently provides a more complete solution.

The cost of a UiPath Test Suite license for five users is over $10,000 USD. We must purchase a license based on the number of users in our organization.

I would rate UiPath Test Suite nine out of ten.

As a support person in the UiPath environment, I've noticed that license expiration often triggers advanced email notifications, prompting password changes or license updates within specific timelines. Troubleshooting these issues revolves around effective communication, as automation must be handled in collaboration. It's essential to prioritize checking these aspects regularly. For business exceptions, I personally investigate any missed steps. However, application exceptions like URL errors or website crashes require application-level troubleshooting. I often attempt multiple approaches, but business exceptions typically necessitate personal intervention. Reporting is a crucial method for troubleshooting all issues. If UiPath or its Studio crashes, system maintenance, such as repairing or reinstalling the application with a refreshed license, can resolve the problem. I've encountered these troubleshooting challenges, and this approach has proven effective.

I have primarily used the community version for the past six and a half years. However, I am aware that my organization uses the older paid version. For example, the enterprise version I used in my previous organization was 2022.10, while the community version is 2024.10 and later. Although the community version offers daily updates, there is a risk that features I implement may be modified in the future, leading to potential exceptions. For general tasks like running and testing, the community version is ideal. Therefore, I mainly use the community version for personal purposes but prefer the enterprise version for end-user applications.

From a maintenance perspective, maintenance is the developer's responsibility. Their primary responsibility is to check the number of failed and successful tests. However, as an application exception, if a UiPath Test Suite Manager is not configured, the developer must report this to the tenant and request that the feature be enabled before it can be used.

If a company is cost-conscious, it should consider alternative vendor applications like Automation Anywhere, Power Automate, or Kofax. These options are generally less expensive than UiPath Test Suite, especially for organizations with fewer than 500 employees. For example, UiPath licenses can start at around $2,300 USD, while Microsoft Power Automate can be obtained for as little as $230 USD.

To effectively automate with UiPath, a foundational understanding of coding structures is essential. This knowledge empowers users to navigate the automation process more efficiently. With a solid coding base, learning UiPath may be easier. My personal experience, having started UiPath automation immediately after graduating, confirms the importance of coding skills. Many individuals without coding experience find automation jobs less appealing, focusing solely on tool usage. Therefore, I recommend prioritizing the development of coding skills before delving into automation. This approach ensures a more fulfilling experience and opens doors to other technical roles, such as data engineering or data analysis, for those with a strong coding background.

We mainly work with web as well as desktop automation. One of our use cases was to raise a ticket from the web portal to the ServiceNow defect management tool, and another was the need to interact with a Linux server through PuTTY. We use UiPath to run different ETL jobs.

When ETL jobs failed, our team used to manually rerun them and log a ticket in ServiceNow. Before restarting a job, they might have to perform some type of operation on it, such as a modification in the data pipeline or the removal of bad data. Or they might have to execute Linux commands. We have automated the restart and execution, and we then send a notification to Outlook as well.

Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days.

In our current scope, we have to interact with different kinds of applications, including mobile and desktop. UiPath definitely helps us seamlessly interact with these different kinds of applications, and now we can successfully automate any kind of workflow. We can easily automate any kind of complex scenario.

It is definitely easy to build automations with UiPath. Tricentis Tosca and UiPath are both user-friendly.

I would like to see users have the ability to add their own healing features, such as activating object-healing processes. If they could add that feature, that would be beneficial.

It would be something like a rescan. With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties.

I would like UiPath to add that capability. It should be able to rescan a page and report to the user the properties that have been changed, and then allow the user to decide which properties they want to update in the object repository.

We have been using UiPath for about one year.

UiPath is quite a stable product.

UiPath's technical support is quite strong. They could improve on their speed of response.

Positive

Earlier, we used Selenium for automation to interact with web applications only. But we were looking for one tool that can interact with all kinds of applications, such as API-based applications as well as mobile and desktop applications.

I was involved from deployment to implementation and execution. It was a straightforward process. The installation only took one to two hours. I did it myself. There are straightforward instructions and default settings. I just needed to click "next, next."

Using both UiPath and Tosca, we have achieved about 70 to 80 percent ROI. We used to require 10 team members for execution, and now we hardly need two to three resources.

The time-to-value of UiPath, from the initial development of our automation suite until we saw automation working at some level, took about three months.

On the pricing front, Tosca is a bit more costly than UiPath, but UiPath is also pretty expensive compared to other tools. But on the performance front, when it comes to execution, both tools are more mature. And we can automate quickly with both products. Both are keyword-driven, and there is no scripting required. Even with a large application, we can speed up automation.

Both tools are quite capable of integrating with CI/CD tools, as well as test management tools like ALM, JIRA, or a source control repository.

For maintenance, Tosca is better than UiPath. Tosca has a rescan feature, so we can rescan objects. You just need to rescan the entire web page, and it will automatically update the object properties. That way, there is no need to manually update them. We definitely save time there. It's on the rescan front that UiPath lags compared to Tosca.

I also use Selenium, but it has many disadvantages. Selenium is mainly designed for web applications, but there are limitations for automating using APIs as well as desktop applications and mobile. UiPath is much stronger. The only advantage is that Selenium is open source.

Overall, UiPath is a good tool. I would definitely recommend it for automation over Tosca.

The primary use case of the UiPath Test Suite is testing. Every process could have unexpected issues, so the primary use case is that there is a defined set of steps for every scenario, so you'd probably create different scenarios and data. You can also handle data dynamically because, for the same set of values, you can run that differently for different test data and have mock test flows.

For example, the best use case for UiPath Test Suite is when you have a website where people create an account. For that account, you can create the part with correct values, then you can feed all the values that are out of bound, such as special characters, or you can have a different value entered, which is not accepted so that you can play around with it. Each of the scenarios mentioned helps a lot, so when you get that over to the client, and every time there's a new deployment, the client can just directly run the tree test to ensure that every functionality works well, which helps reduce the support the client would need as well as budget in the long run. The client might have to spend a little longer to develop this, but it's a one-time task, which means that only when something new comes up, you might have to update the test script, reducing the effort to communicate with the vendor or developer back and forth. UiPath Test Suite also helps ensure that the test cases work well, allowing you to go ahead and run the final process and production.

UiPath Test Suite has helped improve my client's organization as the client doesn't have to come back to me or my team multiple times. The tool has reduced the client's need to communicate with me or my company.

At the time of development, the time usually increases by twenty to thirty percent, which includes how my team would develop the test cases. Still, no extra time would be involved later when the client uses the UiPath Test Suite. The client would just need to run the tool or schedule it once a week to ensure the process works well, and won't have to check with my team or company if it's working fine. Even though the bot is failing or there's a design issue, the client just has to check the tool and see if any test script is failing. If the script is not failing, that means there's a data issue from the client's end, which means the client doesn't have to rely on my company to fix it. UiPath Test Suite really helped the client reduce costs. Even though the development costs took a hit initially, it was better for the client in the long run.

I like that UiPath Test Suite is a very helpful tool that many people have not appropriately explored, but as I started my career as a tester, I understand how useful it is. I've used RPA and testing tools for at least two months, and I found UiPath Test Suite a good tool that lets me design scripts and ensure that the client is not worried about the basic process. The tool works as expected and handles one of the most important exceptions in the process.

Using UiPath Test Suite has also been economical for the client, who used to have an RPA admin who managed the processes and monitored whether all worked well. Still, if any issue came up, the client had to come to my team of developers to have the problem fixed. I created the test and the scripts for the processes. The client could also run the bot based on a schedule to ensure the process runs well, each account is up-to-date, and there is no failure in the process, but as soon as an item is flagged, the client has to come to my team. However, with UiPath Test Suite, the client doesn't have to connect with developers or my team, which saves a significant amount of time, and also means needing just one person to manage or handle the processes, rather than being charged every time my team provides help to the client, helping save on costs as well.

UiPath Test Suite can help with the automation you're developing. If I did another workflow, for example, and I want to test it, I can feed it different parameters, as every workflow can have parameters fed into it. UiPath Test Suite can take values from an Excel sheet or data table and show the data or records list, including all the different scenarios. Regarding what the tool can test, it can test anything you can develop from your end. There is no limitation to what UiPath Test Suite can help develop and test.

What I like most about UiPath Test Suite is that it's straightforward, and any user who knows how to use the UiPath Studio can learn how to create a test script in as fast as thirty minutes. There's nothing new you must learn to use UiPath Test Suite because it only has three sections: Given, Then, and When. You divide your script and predefine the values, what will be the input, and what steps you have to take to ensure a specific scenario works, and then you trigger the workflow based on the parameters you provided for the script. Then, you may have to close some applications and wrap up that exhibition for that scenario, so using UiPath Test Suite is very straightforward. The tool is easy to learn, so any user who's probably gone through UiPath's advanced developer certification would have also gone through the UiPath Test Suite. Not everybody implements it, but I feel the tool should be implemented because it's beneficial.

Apart from being developers, my company is also a UiPath partner, which means it has better access to connecting with the UiPath team and getting solutions faster, which I find valuable in the UiPath Test Suite.

I like that the tool shows you how much percentage is covered out of all scenarios you run and the conditions, such as if conditions, wild conditions, or some exception handling.

If something has been missed, you can also tweak and improve the test scripts to ensure every activity is fetched when it's tested so nothing's missed out and ensure all runs fine, which I also like about UiPath Test Suite. In the test field or the test manager, when you go to the architecture, you can also see the percentage and when you run it locally in your machine, which helps you identify whether it needs to be handled.

My impression of UiPath Test Suite having the ability to automate tests from a wide range of technologies is that it has the advantage over other tools. When I started learning RPA, I was working with the testing team, and I wished there was a test kit like UiPath Test Suite at the time. I created an automation to test an application, and compared to that, UiPath Test Suite definitely had an advantage. Even Automation Anywhere and Power Automate didn't have functionalities found in the UiPath Test Suite.

UiPath has also matured a lot in the last two years, as it provides offerings such as task mining, process mining, and document understanding, which may also be found in other automation or RPA tools. Still, UiPath Test Suite is the only tool I've not seen in competitors, which is why UiPath is at an excellent advantage if you know how to use it. It's not difficult to learn, and if you know how to develop in UiPath Studio, you can easily develop and use UiPath Test Suite.

The tool helped free up staff or employee time for other projects because you would not need a separate testing team at all. An employee handling the testing could be cross-trained to do development work. For example, your team could spend more time developing and designing, learning other skills, and improving work.

As for integrating UiPath Test Suite with other lifecycle tools and applications, you can integrate it as long as your application has APIs involved. Say you have to integrate a flow that runs on ServiceNow, which can be integrated with an API. It will work with the UiPath Test Suite. However, if it involves running on a desktop or machine, that would involve UI elements, requiring you to stick to the UI part and develop the workflow instead of integrating it, so that would vary with what type of flow you are looking into. If it's API-based, you can use UiPath Test Suite, but if it's desktop-based, it would be best to use the built-in tool.

The tool helped reduce maintenance, as it has reduced the need to communicate between clients and my company, which helps in terms of maintenance. Maintenance was reduced by thirty to forty percent, mainly from relaying test cases properly and teams following the standards. Maintenance only involves one person and doesn't require the involvement of many people.

UiPath Test Suite also helped reduce the total cost of ownership or testing by thirty percent. The tool only requires more development time initially, but then it does save time in the long run.

An area for improvement in the UiPath Test Suite is maintaining file locations, as that's currently challenging. Say I'm creating a test script, and I create some test data that runs the test script usually created in an Excel sheet. What happens is whenever I import or export from the tool, I have to ensure it contains the Excel sheet with it, which can become a challenge in terms of maintaining the file. It would be better if the files could be on the cloud through a data service within the tool, allowing you to use tables or maybe integrate with an SQL server.

Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally, because for every workflow you develop, you have to create a test for it, and for each test, you have to create a script, which means you need to create in an Excel sheet.

Another area for improvement in the UiPath Test Suite is its limitation in handling all kinds of variables. It works fine ninety percent of the time, but ten percent of the time, you'd have an issue where you can't just handle it with a string. You'd need some other data type as well, which is currently a limitation of the tool.

I've been using UiPath Test Suite for a year, mainly with my recent client. Not every client usually goes for UiPath Test Suite because, most of the time, the client utilizes a group of testers for manual tests or other tests, in which the client hires testers to do the testing and then validate the results. Most clients do not follow the standard process, so it varies from client to client, but my experience with UiPath Test Suite comes from one client who specifically wanted to follow the standard process and ensure that the data is up to the mark.

UiPath Test Suite has been pretty stable ninety percent of the time. Stability-wise, the tool can be unpredictable ten percent of the time because the same workflow running with the test case can be a problem.

For example, when using the Excel sheet, the challenge is that every value you feed into it must be a string. If you change the parameters or variable type to an integer or any other kind, it can't handle it, which could affect stability ten percent of the time.

There's no issue with UiPath Test Suite scalability-wise. If the area for improvement on storing scripts locally is addressed, then the tool can be scaled to any number without issue.

For UiPath Test Suite support, I've handled communicating with support for some of the client's users, and the team has been very helpful and has been doing follow-ups on time.

Some issues can be solved via email, while some require a call, and I usually get the calls scheduled quickly. Support for UiPath Test Suite has been very good, so I'm rating support eight out of ten.

Positive

I didn't use a different solution before UiPath Test Suite.

Deploying the UiPath Test Suite is straightforward. Within twenty to thirty minutes, you'll be able to learn how to do it, as the process is not complicated. The tool is straightforward to develop and deploy. It's similar to deploying any other process on UiPath Studio. You have the option to either publish the solution or the test cases.

The deployment of UiPath Test Suite only took a matter of seconds because you just had to click "Publish." You go to the UiPath Orchestrator and run the script. The deployment is not complicated in any way.

As UiPath Test Suite is included within the UiPath Studio and is not a separate application, installing it, giving permissions, and logging into your account on your local machine doesn't take more than a few minutes.

I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing.

UiPath Test Suite is developed on-premises or on your local machine. Once you've completed the development, you deploy it on the UiPath Orchestrator. Within UiPath Orchestrator, there's a testing tab with test scripts that you can run locally, but the target or vision is to develop it locally and run it on the UiPath Orchestrator.

The client has about ten to fifteen employees using UiPath Test Suite for automation, while at least two people use it for testing, which saves some time and effort.

In terms of maintaining UiPath Test Suite, if an automation needs an update or UiPath Studio needs to be updated, then UiPath Test Suite would also need to be updated.

To anyone who'd say that their automation testing process could be too complex for UiPath Test Suite, I'd say they would still want to see what part of it can be tested. Sometimes, there could be a challenge where you can't create a test script for a particular scenario. However, that wouldn't apply to all scenarios. Though you may not be able to cover one hundred percent with UiPath Test Suite, the tool could still cover at least seventy to eighty percent of the scenarios, including complicated ones that are pretty difficult to handle. Still, most of the time, those won't be an issue with UiPath Test Suite.

I would recommend the UiPath Test Suite to others. If you want to get comfortable with it, go ahead and create a test case for one workflow and see how it works. My advice to others is to test the tool out. I would definitely recommend it as no other solution has this offering, and I find the UiPath Test Suite very useful.

My rating for UiPath Test Suite is a solid seven. I see a lot of room for improvement, but UiPath is going in the right direction.

My company is a partner of UiPath, working with multiple enterprise clients.

We use Test Suite for many types of testing, including origination, smoke, and web application testing. We are slowly migrating all of our test cases, but so far, we have primarily used it for our smoke and regression test cases. We mostly automate Windows .NET technologies. UiPath also works with web application frameworks like React, Angler, and Java. 

UiPath Test Suite helps us automate our testing. Other tools like Selenium require you to learn the language, or you need a specialist to write the scripts. With UiPath, we can automate manual testing using team members who are not that technical. It's easy to learn and requires no coding skills. So we were easily able to achieve our objectives.

Web applications are always easy to automate. The challenge is implementing or automating a Windows application, but we can do that successfully. UiPath Test Suite has freed staff to work on other projects. It's hard to quantify, but the initial time savings was high because it runs 24/7. One manual tester works 40 hours weekly, and we had four testers, so that's 160 hours. We can now complete the same work with around four hours of manual work. 

It's easy to integrate UiPath with other tools like Azure DevOps for running those bars and generating the test history. It also comes with out-of-the-box Jira integration. Hundreds of tools are available, and it integrates with most of the popular ones. Some tools, like Micro Focus Octane, don't have native integration, but UiPath has connectors for those.

UiPath has also reduced the time spent on maintenance. Otherwise, when we make changes, we need to test all the steps manually. We're progressing toward becoming fully automated, but it has cut maintenance time in half so far. 

Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package. 

Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work. 

I have used UiPath Test Suite for more than five years.

I rate UiPath support a 10 out of 10. They've been fantastic and are always there to help customers. 

Positive

We saw benefits from using UiPath Test Suite almost immediately. We did a proof of concept for about two weeks and put it into production

UiPath Test Suite is a cost-effective solution. Orchestrator is the most expensive UiPath module, costing around $20,000, but you don't need to purchase Orchestrator to use Test Suite. You can buy a nonproductive version that costs about $2,400. It's a better value than other products I've seen. 

I rate UiPath Test Suite a nine out of ten. We started with Test Suite, but now that we have UiPath in place, we can also automate our processes. That's UiPath's advantage. It isn't simply a testing solution. We have the option to scale up our test cases or automate other processes. It's one of the benefits of using an RPA tool for testing. 

UiPath has a few minor areas that need improvement like mobile testing, but they are constantly adding features like AI-driven functionality. I'm optimistic about the platform's potential. 

We use the solution to automate tests. We have different teams implementing different applications. My responsibility is to use it on end-to-end tests.

There are a lot of benefits of automation. We probably have reduced the number of incidents in production, but that's very difficult to estimate. We are finding bugs and defects much faster. We have very fast feedback when we do automated tests. We also have much better documentation of our applications. We may have documentation written down somewhere, but it is hard to maintain. When we have automated tests running, our application is actively working.

The most important thing in the solution is the robotic part. It’s fundamental. It should be able to go across, and that is what robust robotics does. It is the core functionality of UiPath. There's a lot of things we can do. We can integrate it into our CI/CD pipeline. We also can schedule runs in Orchestrator.

We monitor the runs on Orchestrator. Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand. We almost need to have certification to use it.

I have been using the solution for three and a half years.

The product is stable.

Primarily, around 30 developers use the product in our organization. It is scalable.

I am satisfied with the technical support. There are various channels we can use. My developers are using those. I haven't heard them complain about it.

Positive

The initial deployment was straightforward because we had already deployed the robotics part. We had several instances of tests, but we already ran robotics, so we had infrastructure in place. The deployment was quick. We ordered the service and downloaded the software. That was the easy part. Usually, we would see a lot of issues, but we have an expert to solve those issues when we need to install things. The solution is deployed centrally. Anybody who wants access to it can have it.

We have patches and upgrades, as always. It’s not a challenge, but we need to do that sometimes. It is usually done during the night. The tool does require maintenance. Whenever the changes are done in the applications, we need to change our test cases.

When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced. The price was almost the same as the big competitors. I have heard that the price has increased. However, it was fairly priced when we bought it.

We implemented the solution because we didn't have a common test automation tool. We needed a common test automation tool that could go across a lot of applications. We can have various tools that may be used for UI, DB, or API, but we needed something that could go across a lot of applications.

We use various UIs, Citrix, SAP, API calls, and database queries. The ability of Test Suite to automate tests from a wide range of technologies is very high. We haven't found anything we cannot do. We didn't do automation in the range we do now.

We haven't integrated much. The tool can be integrated with CI/CD pipelines. There are some plugins available, at least for Jenkins, but we have tried to integrate with others without issues. We have also integrated with some pipelines in Jira. We haven't found issues when we tried to integrate with other tools. However, we haven't done that much.

We find defects faster now. It's a very important part of automated tests. The faster we can find defects and bugs, the less cost or time it takes to resolve them. If a bug is introduced in any environment and we find it out after two weeks, it is quite difficult to find out what we did two weeks ago. If we get the response immediately after we have deployed something into an environment, we can understand it quickly. That's a very important part of automated tests.

We are now running thousands of test cases every day. If we want to do that manually, we'll never get the money from management to do that range of testing. However, it's almost free when we get it automated. We cannot compare the two. We're not saving costs directly on testing. We are saving costs on faster feedback and faster delivery of new features.

A big part of UiPath is robotics. If it is not available, we can develop it ourselves. We used RPA for many years. There are some differences. We need to have Test Suite to test things. It was not a big change for the organization and the resources needed. We cannot calculate ROI. We see benefits when we have fast feedback and probably fewer incidents in production.

We didn't see time to value immediately. We saw time to value with Test Suite within half a year or one year. There are discussions about UiPath. They say that anybody can use UiPath. My recommendation would be to use well-educated developers. They must have some education or certification on UiPath. However, they are expensive.

Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

I have multiple use cases. We build automation across platforms of UiPath, including Test Suite. It helps with document understanding and Citrix automation. UiPath automates regular tasks. I had to build an automation to extract information from a web interface and upload all the information to all the data to a terminal interface.

In Test Suite, I work with Oracle and SAP. It provides integrations to both.

We have an in-house Oracle testing team, and they've been tasked with HCM and ERP solutions on Oracle and have completely cloud-based interfaces. The Test Suite has helped us to build testing specifically for quarterly upgrades. We were able to integrate a significant workload during the quarterly updates. 

The complete test automation framework is quite useful. It's helpful for testing end frameworks and for building test cases.

I've explored usage across a couple of applications and it's been great. I've not had any issues, especially in the web-based sector. 

Within two months, we were able to realize the benefits of Test Suite since we had to do extensive testing. The automation helped reduce the manual labor usually needed for quarterly testing. 

By itself, it provides a lot of integrations with more than a thousand applications. We could use it for Oracle and SAP and it did help significantly.

While I don't have exact numbers, the time to value was good. 

The solution can cost more than other options.

I've used the solution for more than six years now. 

The solution is definitely scalable. The only challenge would be that if there is a significant requirement change, it would need additional development and deployment.

Technical support from UiPath is very helpful. 

Positive

We also use Power Automate for automation; we did not use a different solution for testing. 

The initial deployment was straightforward. The suite deployment does not take much time. However, it takes time building other test cases and the initial unit testing and user acceptance testing. Deployment, I would say, took approximately one week. We built out about 60 use cases. 

There were three of us that handled the deployment - one junior developer, one senior developer and a solution architect. We did a cloud-based implementation. It was deployed on Azure using virtual machines. 

There's only maintenance if there are process changes for particular implementations. 

We did not use any third-party vendors as part of the deployment process.

The ROI was impressive. For example, for one client, we developed a solution that helped reduce effort by three-fifths. We were able to reduce the equivalent of three full-time employees for every upgrade. 

Automation Anywhere technically offers much better pricing and it's relatively more transparent than UiPath. However, UiPath is more customized for specific client requirements. They also provide a wide variety of features for the price. 

There may be extra costs, depending on the requirements. If it's a standard automation, there are no additional fees.

We did a market evaluation and found this solution to be the best option. We looked at, for example, Automation Anywhere. AA does not provide as many integrations. Also, UiPath architecture is superior and has a better interface to manage automation compared to Automation Anywhere. 

We are UiPath partners. 

While it depends on the scenario, for those who think automation testing is too complex, I'd say the framework provides a good automation opportunity. You can even do complex testing as long as there is good repetition.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.