Test Bench vs GStack Review vs QA Loop

高信号 PR 评审的首选。它读的是 diff 本身，而不是把整个仓库重新总结一遍，所以评审会落在真正变化的代码上。最擅长信任边界类问题——SQL 注入、鉴权检查、条件分支副作用——这些在浅层评审里最容易漏掉。纯样式问题别用它，丢给 linter 更划算。建议先在普通 feature 分支上验过一次，再放到 hot-fix 流程里用。

Best first pick for high-signal PR review. It reads the actual diff instead of re-summarizing the whole repo, so the review stays grounded in code that changed. Strongest on trust-boundary cases — SQL injection, auth checks, conditional side-effects — where surface reviewers usually miss the failure mode. Skip it for pure style nits; bring in a linter instead. Try it on a feature branch before relying on it for hot-fix gating.

做需要留证据链的浏览器 QA，它是最佳选择。每次跑都会产出截图、控制台 diff 和可重放的动作日志——比一句「我在本地测过了」更难被挡回去。适合做合并前关卡，也适合带证据提 bug。别用在单元测试场景，也别在敏感的登录态生产会话里用——截图本身就是数据风险。

Best browser QA pick when you need evidence to leave a paper trail. Each run produces screenshots, console diffs, and a reproducible action log — much harder for stakeholders to wave off than "I tested it locally." Works well as a pre-merge gate and for filing bugs with repro steps attached. Not for unit tests, and not for authenticated production sessions where the screenshot itself becomes a data risk.