{"passport":{"unfragile":{"@version":"1.0","version":"2026-05","artifact":{"id":"applitools","slug":"applitools","name":"Applitools","type":"product","url":"https://applitools.com","page_url":"https://unfragile.ai/applitools","categories":["testing-quality"],"tags":[],"pricing":{"model":"free","free":true,"starting_price":null},"status":"active","verified":false},"capabilities":[{"id":"applitools__cap_0","uri":"capability://image.visual.visual.regression.detection.with.semantic.understanding","name":"visual regression detection with semantic understanding","description":"Applitools' proprietary Visual AI engine compares rendered UI screenshots against baseline images using deep learning trained on 4 billion app screens, detecting meaningful visual changes while automatically filtering out irrelevant differences like anti-aliasing, font rendering, or timestamp variations. The system uses pixel-level analysis combined with semantic understanding of UI components to distinguish intentional design changes from environmental noise, eliminating false positives that plague traditional pixel-diff tools.","intents":["Detect unintended visual regressions in UI changes without maintaining brittle pixel-perfect baselines","Validate design consistency across multiple browsers and devices without manual screenshot review","Reduce false positive alerts from environmental rendering differences while catching real visual bugs"],"best_for":["QA teams managing large visual test suites across multiple browsers/devices","Product teams needing confidence in UI changes without manual screenshot validation","Organizations with high screenshot maintenance burden from traditional pixel-diff tools"],"limitations":["Visual AI training data and algorithms are proprietary — no transparency into what constitutes 'meaningful' vs 'irrelevant' differences","Baseline images are locked into Applitools ecosystem — not portable to other visual testing platforms","Accuracy depends on baseline quality; poor initial baselines propagate through subsequent comparisons","No control over sensitivity thresholds for detecting changes — tuning is limited to binary accept/reject"],"requires":["Test framework with Applitools SDK integration (Cypress, Selenium, Playwright, etc.)","Valid Applitools API key","Initial baseline screenshots established (first test run creates baseline)"],"input_types":["rendered HTML/CSS screenshots","mobile app screenshots (iOS/Android)","PDF documents"],"output_types":["pass/fail test result","visual diff highlighting changed regions","structured test report with metadata"],"categories":["image-visual","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_1","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.cross.browser.and.responsive.design.validation.at.scale","name":"cross-browser and responsive design validation at scale","description":"Applitools' Ultrafast Test Grid executes visual tests in parallel across configurable combinations of browsers, devices, and screen resolutions using cloud-based infrastructure, capturing screenshots and running visual AI analysis simultaneously. The platform abstracts browser provisioning, screenshot capture, and result aggregation, allowing a single test definition to validate against 50+ browser/device combinations without code changes.","intents":["Validate UI consistency across Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, and mobile browsers in a single test run","Test responsive design breakpoints without manually resizing windows or managing device emulators","Reduce test execution time by parallelizing cross-browser validation instead of sequential runs"],"best_for":["Teams building consumer-facing web applications with broad browser support requirements","QA organizations managing cross-browser compatibility testing at scale","Product teams needing rapid feedback on design consistency across devices"],"limitations":["Parallel execution scales to unknown limits — maximum concurrent browser instances not disclosed","Browser/device matrix must be configured upfront; dynamic selection during test execution not supported","Mobile testing uses emulators/simulators, not real devices — may miss device-specific rendering issues","Test execution time depends on Applitools infrastructure load; no SLA guarantees disclosed"],"requires":["Applitools SDK for supported test framework","Test Units subscription (consumption varies by number of browser/device combinations)","Public Cloud or Dedicated Cloud deployment option"],"input_types":["test code with browser/device configuration","URL or application under test"],"output_types":["visual comparison results per browser/device","aggregated pass/fail status","cross-browser compatibility report"],"categories":["automation-workflow","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_10","uri":"capability://image.visual.mobile.app.visual.testing.with.native.ios.android.support","name":"mobile app visual testing with native ios/android support","description":"Applitools extends visual testing to native iOS and Android applications via SDKs that integrate with XCTest (iOS) and Espresso (Android) test frameworks. The platform captures screenshots from running app instances, compares against baselines using the same Visual AI engine as web testing, and reports visual regressions with cross-device consistency validation.","intents":["Detect visual regressions in native iOS/Android apps without manual screenshot comparison","Validate UI consistency across iOS and Android versions of the same app","Test responsive layouts and device-specific rendering in mobile apps"],"best_for":["Mobile development teams building iOS/Android apps","QA organizations testing cross-platform mobile applications","Product teams needing visual regression detection in mobile CI/CD pipelines"],"limitations":["Requires native test framework integration (XCTest, Espresso) — not compatible with cross-platform frameworks like React Native or Flutter","Mobile app testing requires device provisioning or emulator setup — adds infrastructure complexity","Screenshot capture timing and device state management can introduce flakiness","Limited to emulator/simulator testing — no real device cloud integration disclosed"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes mobile SDK for iOS (XCTest) or Android (Espresso)","Native test framework (XCTest or Espresso)","iOS simulator or Android emulator configured","Test Units subscription"],"input_types":["native iOS/Android app under test","test code with Applitools SDK calls"],"output_types":["visual comparison results per device/orientation","cross-device consistency report","pass/fail validation"],"categories":["image-visual","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_11","uri":"capability://image.visual.storybook.component.visual.testing.with.isolated.component.validation","name":"storybook component visual testing with isolated component validation","description":"Applitools integrates with Storybook to automatically capture and test component stories, validating visual consistency of UI components across different states and variants. The system treats each story as a visual test case, comparing rendered components against baselines to detect unintended changes in component appearance or behavior.","intents":["Validate component visual consistency across all defined stories without manual testing","Detect unintended changes to component appearance when refactoring component code","Maintain component design system consistency across application"],"best_for":["Teams using Storybook for component development and documentation","Design system teams maintaining shared component libraries","Organizations practicing component-driven development"],"limitations":["Requires Storybook setup and story definitions — not applicable to projects without Storybook","Story quality directly impacts test quality — poorly written stories produce unreliable tests","Component testing is isolated — does not validate component integration or interaction with parent components","Visual baselines must be maintained per story variant — large component libraries create significant baseline management overhead"],"requires":["Storybook configured in project","Applitools Eyes Storybook integration enabled","Test Units subscription","Storybook running and accessible during test execution"],"input_types":["Storybook stories (component variants and states)"],"output_types":["visual comparison per story","component consistency report","pass/fail validation"],"categories":["image-visual","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_12","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.test.execution.scheduling.and.environment.management","name":"test execution scheduling and environment management","description":"Applitools provides scheduling capabilities to run tests on defined intervals (nightly, weekly, etc.) across multiple environments (dev, staging, production) with environment-specific baseline management. The system allows teams to configure which tests run in which environments and at what frequency, with results aggregated by environment for environment-specific regression detection.","intents":["Run visual tests automatically on schedule without manual triggering","Validate visual consistency across dev, staging, and production environments","Detect environment-specific visual regressions (e.g., production CSS differences)"],"best_for":["Teams needing continuous validation across multiple environments","Organizations with nightly or periodic test execution requirements","QA teams managing environment-specific test configurations"],"limitations":["Scheduling is limited to predefined intervals — no cron expression support disclosed","Environment-specific baselines require manual configuration — no automatic baseline selection","Test execution time depends on Applitools infrastructure load — no guaranteed execution windows","Failed scheduled tests require manual investigation — no automatic alerting or escalation"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes or Autonomous product","Test Units subscription","Environment URLs and credentials configured","Scheduled test configuration in Applitools dashboard"],"input_types":["test code","environment configuration (URL, credentials)","schedule definition (interval, frequency)"],"output_types":["scheduled test execution results","environment-specific regression reports","execution history and trends"],"categories":["automation-workflow","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_13","uri":"capability://image.visual.mobile.app.testing.with.ios.and.android.support","name":"mobile app testing with ios and android support","description":"Applitools supports visual testing of native iOS and Android mobile applications using Appium or native mobile testing frameworks, capturing screenshots from real devices or emulators and comparing against baselines using Visual AI. Teams can validate mobile UI across device sizes, orientations, and OS versions without manual testing.","intents":["I want to test my iOS and Android apps for visual regressions automatically","I need to validate responsive design across different mobile devices and screen sizes","I want to catch mobile-specific rendering issues (safe areas, notches, etc.)"],"best_for":["Mobile app development teams building iOS and Android applications","Organizations with cross-platform mobile apps that need consistent visual appearance","Teams that want to shift mobile testing left into automated testing"],"limitations":["Mobile testing requires Appium or native mobile testing framework integration","Real device testing is more expensive than emulator testing — Test Unit consumption may be higher","Touch interactions and gestures are difficult to test automatically — may require manual testing","Device fragmentation (1000+ device/OS combinations) makes comprehensive testing expensive"],"requires":["Appium or native mobile testing framework (XCTest, Espresso, etc.)","Applitools SDK for mobile testing","iOS and/or Android application under test"],"input_types":["mobile app screenshots","device/OS configuration"],"output_types":["mobile visual regression reports","device-specific visual diffs"],"categories":["image-visual","automation-workflow"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_2","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.automated.test.generation.from.natural.language.descriptions","name":"automated test generation from natural language descriptions","description":"Applitools' AI-powered test generation accepts plain English descriptions of user workflows and automatically generates executable test code using Natural Language Processing and code generation models. The system parses intent from text, maps it to UI interactions, and produces framework-specific test code (Cypress, Selenium, etc.) with built-in visual checkpoints, reducing manual test authoring effort.","intents":["Generate functional test code from business requirements without writing test automation code","Accelerate test suite creation for teams with limited test automation expertise","Create visual checkpoints automatically without manually specifying screenshot locations"],"best_for":["QA teams with limited test automation programming skills","Product managers or business analysts wanting to define tests in natural language","Organizations needing rapid test coverage expansion without hiring automation engineers"],"limitations":["Generated test code quality depends on description clarity — ambiguous requirements produce unreliable tests","Complex workflows with conditional logic or error handling may require manual code refinement","Generated tests inherit limitations of underlying test framework (Cypress, Selenium, etc.)","No feedback loop for improving generation accuracy based on test failures"],"requires":["Applitools Autonomous product subscription","Application under test accessible via web browser","Clear, structured natural language descriptions of test scenarios"],"input_types":["plain English text describing user workflows","application URL"],"output_types":["executable test code (Cypress, Selenium, Playwright)","test with embedded visual checkpoints"],"categories":["code-generation-editing","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_3","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.intelligent.test.locator.self.healing.with.automatic.maintenance","name":"intelligent test locator self-healing with automatic maintenance","description":"Applitools' self-healing locators automatically detect when UI element selectors (CSS, XPath) become stale due to DOM changes and generate corrected selectors without test failure, using machine learning to understand element identity across structural variations. When a locator fails, the system analyzes the current DOM, identifies the intended element based on visual and structural context, and updates the locator for future runs.","intents":["Reduce test maintenance burden from broken selectors caused by minor DOM refactoring","Keep tests passing through UI changes without manual selector updates","Automatically adapt to CSS class renames, ID changes, or HTML structure modifications"],"best_for":["Teams with large test suites experiencing high maintenance overhead from selector brittleness","Agile teams with frequent UI changes who need tests to adapt automatically","Organizations lacking dedicated test maintenance resources"],"limitations":["Self-healing accuracy depends on element uniqueness — ambiguous or duplicate elements may heal to wrong target","Healing only works for visual/structural changes; semantic DOM changes (e.g., role attribute removal) may not be detected","Healed selectors are Applitools-specific — not portable to other test frameworks","No visibility into healing decisions — black-box behavior makes debugging difficult when healing fails"],"requires":["Applitools SDK integration with test framework","Tests written using Applitools locator APIs (not raw Selenium/Cypress selectors)","Visual baseline established for element identification"],"input_types":["test code with Applitools locator references","application DOM"],"output_types":["corrected selector for failed locator","test result with healed locator applied"],"categories":["automation-workflow","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_4","uri":"capability://safety.moderation.accessibility.compliance.validation.with.automated.scanning","name":"accessibility compliance validation with automated scanning","description":"Applitools' accessibility testing module automatically scans rendered pages for WCAG 2.1 compliance violations including color contrast, missing alt text, heading hierarchy, form labels, and keyboard navigation issues. The system integrates accessibility analysis into visual test execution, reporting accessibility violations alongside visual regressions in a unified test report.","intents":["Detect accessibility violations (WCAG 2.1) automatically without manual audits or separate tools","Validate color contrast, alt text, heading structure, and form labeling in CI/CD pipeline","Generate accessibility compliance reports for regulatory or legal requirements"],"best_for":["Organizations with accessibility compliance requirements (government, healthcare, finance)","Product teams wanting to shift accessibility testing left into development workflow","QA teams needing automated accessibility scanning without separate tools"],"limitations":["Automated scanning detects only structural/technical violations — cannot assess semantic accessibility or user experience for disabled users","False positives common for dynamic content or complex interactive components","Requires manual verification of violations; automated detection is not sufficient for compliance certification","Limited to visual/DOM analysis — cannot test screen reader compatibility or keyboard navigation behavior"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes product with accessibility module enabled","Test Units subscription (accessibility checks consume additional units)","Application under test accessible via web browser"],"input_types":["rendered HTML page","WCAG 2.1 conformance level (A, AA, AAA)"],"output_types":["list of accessibility violations with severity","remediation guidance","compliance report"],"categories":["safety-moderation","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_5","uri":"capability://image.visual.pdf.and.document.visual.testing.with.content.extraction","name":"pdf and document visual testing with content extraction","description":"Applitools extends visual testing to PDF documents and generated reports, capturing rendered PDF output and comparing against baselines to detect unintended changes in layout, formatting, or content. The system extracts text content from PDFs for assertion-based validation and supports testing of dynamically generated documents (invoices, reports, certificates).","intents":["Validate PDF generation doesn't break layout or formatting when code changes","Test dynamically generated documents (invoices, reports) for consistency across variations","Detect unintended changes in PDF content or structure without manual review"],"best_for":["Teams generating PDFs programmatically (invoicing, reporting, document generation)","QA organizations testing document-heavy applications","Compliance teams needing to validate generated document consistency"],"limitations":["PDF testing requires document generation to be part of test execution — cannot test pre-generated static PDFs","Text extraction accuracy depends on PDF structure; scanned PDFs or complex layouts may fail","Visual baselines for PDFs are large and storage-intensive — impacts Test Unit consumption","No support for interactive PDF features (forms, annotations)"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes product with PDF testing support","Test code that generates or retrieves PDF output","Test Units subscription (PDF testing consumes additional units per page)"],"input_types":["PDF file generated during test execution","PDF URL"],"output_types":["visual comparison per PDF page","extracted text content","pass/fail validation"],"categories":["image-visual","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_6","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.test.execution.orchestration.with.ci.cd.pipeline.integration","name":"test execution orchestration with ci/cd pipeline integration","description":"Applitools integrates with CI/CD platforms (GitHub Actions, CircleCI, Jenkins, etc.) via webhooks and native actions, triggering test execution on code commits, pull requests, or scheduled intervals. The platform provides test result reporting back to CI/CD systems with pass/fail status, visual diffs, and accessibility violations, enabling automated test gates in deployment pipelines.","intents":["Automatically run visual tests on every pull request to catch regressions before merge","Gate deployments on test results without manual test execution","Schedule nightly or periodic test runs across multiple environments"],"best_for":["Development teams using GitHub, GitLab, CircleCI, or Jenkins for CI/CD","Organizations implementing shift-left testing with automated gates","Teams needing continuous validation across development, staging, and production"],"limitations":["CI/CD integration requires test framework SDK setup — not zero-configuration","Test execution time adds latency to CI/CD pipeline; no SLA guarantees disclosed","Flaky tests or baseline instability can block deployments — requires robust baseline management","Limited visibility into test execution logs within CI/CD UI — must navigate to Applitools dashboard for details"],"requires":["CI/CD platform with webhook or action support (GitHub Actions, CircleCI, Jenkins, etc.)","Applitools API key configured as CI/CD secret","Test code with Applitools SDK integrated","Test Units subscription"],"input_types":["git commit/pull request event","scheduled trigger","manual trigger"],"output_types":["test execution status (pass/fail)","visual diff report","CI/CD pipeline status update"],"categories":["automation-workflow","tool-use-integration"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_7","uri":"capability://memory.knowledge.visual.baseline.management.with.version.control.and.rollback","name":"visual baseline management with version control and rollback","description":"Applitools maintains a versioned history of visual baselines, allowing teams to review baseline changes, approve new baselines, and rollback to previous versions if needed. The system tracks who approved each baseline change and when, providing audit trail for compliance. Baseline approval workflows can be configured to require manual review before accepting visual changes.","intents":["Review and approve visual changes before they become new baselines","Maintain audit trail of baseline changes for compliance requirements","Rollback to previous baseline if unintended visual changes were approved"],"best_for":["Teams with strict visual change approval processes","Organizations with compliance requirements for design change tracking","QA teams managing large visual test suites with multiple contributors"],"limitations":["Baseline approval workflow requires manual review — cannot be fully automated","Rollback only reverts baseline; does not revert test code changes that caused visual differences","Baseline history storage consumes Test Units or storage quota — long retention may increase costs","No branching support for baseline variants (e.g., A/B test baselines)"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes product","Test Units subscription","Baseline approval workflow configured in Applitools dashboard"],"input_types":["visual test results with new baseline candidates"],"output_types":["baseline version history","approval/rejection decision","audit trail with timestamp and approver"],"categories":["memory-knowledge","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_8","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.automated.visual.test.generation.from.site.crawling","name":"automated visual test generation from site crawling","description":"Applitools' site crawler automatically discovers pages and user flows within an application, generates visual test cases for each discovered page, and creates visual checkpoints at key UI elements. The system requires minimal configuration — provide a starting URL and crawl depth, and the platform generates a test suite covering the application's visual surface area.","intents":["Generate initial visual test coverage without manual test authoring","Discover pages and flows that might be missed in manual test planning","Create baseline visual tests for new applications or features"],"best_for":["Teams needing rapid visual test coverage for new applications","QA organizations with limited test automation resources","Product teams wanting to establish visual regression baseline quickly"],"limitations":["Generated tests cover only discoverable pages — cannot test authenticated flows or dynamic content behind login","Crawl depth must be configured upfront; no intelligent stopping criteria","Generated tests may include irrelevant pages or flows not worth testing","Visual checkpoints are placed automatically — may not align with critical UI elements","Generated tests require refinement for production use; not suitable as-is for continuous testing"],"requires":["Applitools Autonomous product","Application under test accessible via web browser","Starting URL and crawl configuration"],"input_types":["application URL","crawl depth and configuration"],"output_types":["generated test suite with visual checkpoints","baseline screenshots for each discovered page"],"categories":["code-generation-editing","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__cap_9","uri":"capability://data.processing.analysis.test.result.analytics.and.trend.reporting","name":"test result analytics and trend reporting","description":"Applitools aggregates test execution results across runs, environments, and time periods, providing dashboards showing test pass rates, failure trends, and visual change frequency. The system tracks which tests fail most often, which visual changes are most common, and how test reliability evolves over time, enabling data-driven decisions about test maintenance priorities.","intents":["Identify flaky tests or high-maintenance visual baselines requiring attention","Track test reliability trends over time to measure testing effectiveness","Prioritize test maintenance efforts based on failure frequency and impact"],"best_for":["QA teams managing large test suites needing visibility into test health","Organizations measuring testing effectiveness and ROI","Teams wanting data-driven test maintenance prioritization"],"limitations":["Analytics are limited to Applitools-hosted tests — cannot aggregate results from other testing tools","Trend analysis requires historical data; new test suites have limited insights initially","No predictive analytics or ML-based recommendations for test improvements","Data retention limited to 1 year on Public Cloud tier — long-term trend analysis requires Dedicated Cloud"],"requires":["Applitools Eyes or Autonomous product","Test Units subscription","Sufficient test execution history (minimum 10-20 runs for meaningful trends)"],"input_types":["test execution results over time"],"output_types":["pass/fail rate trends","failure frequency by test","visual change frequency","test reliability metrics"],"categories":["data-processing-analysis","testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"applitools__headline","uri":"capability://testing.quality.ai.powered.visual.testing.platform","name":"ai-powered visual testing platform","description":"Applitools is an AI-powered visual testing platform that detects meaningful UI changes using Visual AI, ensuring high-quality user interfaces across multiple devices and browsers.","intents":["best visual testing tool","visual testing platform for cross-browser testing","AI visual testing for responsive design","top tools for UI change detection","visual testing solutions for accessibility checks"],"best_for":["QA testers","developers","product owners"],"limitations":["may struggle with complex UIs","dependency on Visual AI accuracy"],"requires":["web application URLs","mobile app packages"],"input_types":["URLs","mobile application packages","PDF files"],"output_types":["visual diffs","test execution results","accessibility compliance reports"],"categories":["testing-quality"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0}],"trust":{"score":54,"verified":false,"data_access_risk":"high","permissions":["Test framework with Applitools SDK integration (Cypress, Selenium, Playwright, etc.)","Valid Applitools API key","Initial baseline screenshots established (first test run creates baseline)","Applitools SDK for supported test framework","Test Units subscription (consumption varies by number of browser/device combinations)","Public Cloud or Dedicated Cloud deployment option","Applitools Eyes mobile SDK for iOS (XCTest) or Android (Espresso)","Native test framework (XCTest or Espresso)","iOS simulator or Android emulator configured","Test Units subscription"],"failure_modes":["Visual AI training data and algorithms are proprietary — no transparency into what constitutes 'meaningful' vs 'irrelevant' differences","Baseline images are locked into Applitools ecosystem — not portable to other visual testing platforms","Accuracy depends on baseline quality; poor initial baselines propagate through subsequent comparisons","No control over sensitivity thresholds for detecting changes — tuning is limited to binary accept/reject","Parallel execution scales to unknown limits — maximum concurrent browser instances not disclosed","Browser/device matrix must be configured upfront; dynamic selection during test execution not supported","Mobile testing uses emulators/simulators, not real devices — may miss device-specific rendering issues","Test execution time depends on Applitools infrastructure load; no SLA guarantees disclosed","Requires native test framework integration (XCTest, Espresso) — not compatible with cross-platform frameworks like React Native or Flutter","Mobile app testing requires device provisioning or emulator setup — adds infrastructure complexity","builder identity is not verified yet","no observed match outcomes yet"],"rank_breakdown":{"adoption":0.7,"quality":0.9,"ecosystem":0.15000000000000002,"match_graph":0.25,"freshness":0.75,"weights":{"adoption":0.25,"quality":0.25,"ecosystem":0.1,"match_graph":0.35,"freshness":0.05}},"observed_outcomes":{"matches":0,"success_rate":0,"avg_confidence":0,"top_intents":[],"last_matched_at":null},"maintenance":{"status":"active","updated_at":"2026-05-24T12:16:19.836Z","last_scraped_at":null,"last_commit":null},"community":{"stars":null,"forks":null,"weekly_downloads":null,"model_downloads":null,"model_likes":null}},"distribution":{"claim_url":"https://unfragile.ai/submit?claim=applitools","compare_url":"https://unfragile.ai/compare?artifact=applitools"}},"signature":"gKn+f29f5Vf2Qp8P3RhB4erBwlT+KKW0VZRVycBUXBO6LJb+wSgl6wUzcABy2XQMwHDIDwQF3f/1WQihDwCFCA==","signedAt":"2026-06-20T03:02:06.381Z","signedBy":"unfragile.ai","version":1},"_links":{"self":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/passport/applitools","artifact":"https://unfragile.ai/applitools","verify":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/verify?slug=applitools","publicKey":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/trust-passport-public-key","spec":"https://unfragile.ai/trust","schema":"https://unfragile.ai/schema.json","docs":"https://unfragile.ai/docs"}}