Build your product, without writing the code.
Ship more functional, polished projects in less time.
Because something that isn’t your agent is checking the work.
Right now that means I look at your project’s change history myself. No install, and I never ask for your private code.
- Product
- Independent AI project audits
- For you if
- You ship it, you do not read the code
- Governing law
- The judge sits outside the claim
- Round
- Public GitHub projects, about three a week
-
01
The builder’s paper
A public GitHub project built with an AI agent.
Claimed -
02
Your hand
Your account of what feels wrong, written before anything is reviewed.
Yours -
03
The bench’s paper
A clear result, with one thing you can check yourself.
Measured
Three papers, because the audit is written three times. Nobody signs on anyone else’s sheet.
The thing that checks your AI should not be your AI.
When your project looks finished, but will not stay finished.
- It happened again “We fixed this. Again.”
- It happened again “The same page keeps coming back.”
- It said it did “The update says it shipped.”
- The bill is hidden “I cannot tell why this took so long.”
Every line above is something you were told, and none of it has been checked. Your change history can show the repeat before you have a name for it. That is what I look for first.
Start with the record, not the summary.
Today I look for repeat-repair patterns in your change history, and I read every result myself.
I do not certify that your project is finished. You get what the method found, what it could not see, and one thing you can check yourself.
- Repairs
- 7
- Window
- about 6 hours
- Flagged
- repair 3
- Root cause
- named 2.6 days later
The pattern was visible on the third repair. The root cause was named later.
You own the work. You should be able to judge it.
You had something that needed to exist. An AI agent helped build it. Now the project is doing real work, but reading the code was never part of your job.
You still need a way to see whether it is holding up. That is what this is.
Let a stranger project test the method.
17/20 assessable findings confirmed on the first full audit.
Audits are run personally, about three each week. The first round is for public GitHub projects.
A free audit has one trade. An anonymous summary of the project’s change pattern helps improve the method. Publication is always your choice.
Paid route
Upper Crust Club
On Substack. Membership includes an audit of your own project without the anonymous change-pattern contribution.
The first full audit confirmed 17 of 20 assessable findings. That is 85% on tool
version v0.2.0, using full project history and dismissal state
sha256:152929fa8e1c637c. The builder already knew that project.