Record any browser task once and get production-ready code instantly with Demonstrate Mode. Edit further your code in our Automation Studio with live browsers, deploy automation code as a serverless function, and schedule it to run autonomously. Managed sessions, proxies, identities, and vaults handle everything behind the scenes. The fastest path from prototype to production in one unified platform.
Congratulations on the launch! We develop corporate platforms for large corporations a lot — it used to be our main specialization. We’ll definitely check out your project!
The hybrid approach with AgentFallback is really thoughtful. When the agent fallback handles a UI change dynamically, does it automatically update the underlying script selectors, or does it require manual review to commit those fixes permanently?
Getting an automation to run once is usually straightforward. The harder part comes later when it needs to keep running over time without someone constantly checking on it. I like that Demonstrate goes beyond just generating code. You can deploy the workflow right away and set it to run on its own which cuts out lot of the setup work that normally slows this stuff down.
When a recorded workflow depends on things like dynamic selectors, loading states or small layout shifts what parts stay locked as code and what parts stay flexible for the agent to handle at runtime?
Seen both sides of browser automation break in different ways. Agents can deal with surprises but lose reliability fast while scripts usually work fine until a site changes even slightly. Interesting here is not choosing one over the other, but mixing them. Keeping the repeatable steps fixed and using reasoning only where it is actually needed looks closer to how real automation works once things run at scale.
There a big difference between tools that show results and tools that show how those results were reached. A lot of agent based systems hide too much so when something goes wrong you’re left guessing. The way Notte and Demonstrate keep the steps visible and editable suggests more control over time which matters when automations stop being experiments and start being depended on.
Most browser automation tools talk a lot about what they can do but its not always clear how that becomes something usable day to day. Reading this the focus seems to be on building workflows that don’t need constant fixing once they’re set up. That direction comes across as more practical for teams that want automations to keep running longterm instead of becoming another thing to maintain
After trying a few recordings what really matters for me is what happens after the first run. The fact that the recorded flow becomes code you can open, change and run again right away matters a lot. Small tweaks usually force a full redo with other tools so keeping that loop tight inside Demonstrate saves time and avoids redoing work.
Lil question about Demonstrate Mode. How does it handle longer or more complex workflows like ones with repeated steps or small variations along the way? And what happens to the recording when the flow gets more complex?
I wasted an embarrassing amount of time just trying to get a basic browser automation to run. One tool to record another to fix things then something else to actually execute it. Half the time it just dumb.
Tried Demonstrate Mode out of curiosity. Showing the flow once and getting code right away is the first time this hasn’t felt overengineered. Still early but not having to bounce between tools already makes it worth paying attention to. Best of luck team with the launch.
One part of browser automation that always make me pause is handling logins nd sensitive steps. Dealing with credentials, cookies or MFA usually turns into fragile workarounds. Seeing that Notte has built-in support for vaults and managed identities makes this more practical for real workflows especially when automations need to touch accounts or payments.
BTW: Congrats on the launch!
This tool sounds like a lifesaver for automation, but I’m really curious if the "production-ready code" can actually handle tricky elements like CAPTCHAs or dynamic pop-ups. It’s cool that it manages proxies and identities behind the scenes, but how much control do we actually have over those settings? I also wonder if the serverless deployment scales well for heavy tasks and if there’s a way to export the code to our own infrastructure if needed. Finally, is the Automation Studio intuitive enough for someone who isn't a senior dev to debug complex flows?
I have used Notte for quickly building web agent automations. Excited to use Demonstrate Mode to iterate faster!
For quite some time, I believe web or UI agents that allow user to demonstrate use and AI auto correct are the ones that have highest reliability while minimizing maintenance cost. Notte's feature set is very close right now.
When workflows change later like a small UI update or an extra step added by the site how easy is it to update just that part of the recorded flow without redoing everything from scratch or risking downtime?
Demonstrate Mode helps bridge the gap between trying something out and actually using it in production. For me, recording a task once and getting real code I can edit solves a problem I keep running into with other automation tools. Creating the automation, testing it in a live browser and deploying it from the same place keeps everything in one flow. That last part is usually what’s missing when I try to move browser automations into production.
Super cool! Nice how the agent is used as a fallback. Seems like reliability would be much better than an either/or solution.
How do you help users avoid the two big failure modes: (1) black-box agents that silently do the wrong thing, and (2) brittle scripts that break the moment the UI changes—what’s your philosophy on when to use Demonstrate Mode vs Agent Mode vs hand-written code?
Congratulations on the launch! We develop corporate platforms for large corporations a lot — it used to be our main specialization. We’ll definitely check out your project!