From my experience attempting to get a similar workflow down for my company:
I tried to use verilator a while back but ultimately I couldn't because it didn't have same constraints in the verilog language features that I was going to use in production. It doesn't even matter who was missing a feature, verilator or the proprietary tool, it was just about getting them to be same that caused the cognitive dissonance that I didn't want to deal with.
I ultimately decided to move away from verilator and use the clunky proprietary tools since it was what would be used in production. Getting "verilator compatibility" seemed like a "nice to have".
Second, the a winning local-first framework of verilator wasn't really established. You show in your example running a test from the yaml file using what looks like a bash script. Even as an experienced programmer who knows bash and sh well, I still find it very hard to write complex thoughts in it. The last high level attempt I found to bridge this gap is likely https://www.myhdl.org/ I don't know them personally, but it seemed like they had some very good thoughts on what makes writing good hardware level tests good. I think it would be worth reaching out to them if you haven't already.
The one thing that even more critical was a way to run our tests locally. The 10-20 seconds it takes to start a docker image (best case) in the cloud is really frustrating when you are "so close to finding a bug" and you "just want to see if this one line change is going to fix it". Once we got our whole pipeline going, it would take 1-6 minutes to "start a run" since it often had to rebuild previous steps that cache large parts of the design.
So I think you will want to see how you can help bring people's "local's first" workflows slowly into the cloud. Some tools (or just tutorials) that help you take a failing test, and run it locally and on the cloud will be really good especially as you get people to transition!