Agents
Trajectory review
Step-by-step grading of agent runs: plans, tool calls, edits and the final state.
Agentic code review & coding evaluation
Senior engineers review what your agents ship.
Review of model and agent output by vetted software engineers: correctness, security, maintainability and whether the task was actually done, backed by runnable tests and a written verdict.
72-hour paid pilot · Evidence for every expert · Free replacement
What you receive
- Trajectory review
- Pull-request review
- Task & test authoring
- Pairwise code preferences
Delivered as
- Graded trajectories
- Review comments
- Hidden test suites
- Pairwise JSONL
The problem
Passing tests isn't the same as correct.
Coding agents open pull requests, call tools and touch real systems. Unit tests catch some failures. They miss insecure patterns, silent shortcuts and changes that pass the suite while breaking the intent.
Judging that takes an engineer who has shipped and reviewed code at the level you care about, in the language and codebase under test.
- Agents that game the test suite
- Security issues a linter won't flag
- Raters who can't read the code they grade
What we deliver
What you receive.
Backend, frontend, data, ML, mobile and DevOps engineers, matched by language and codebase. Delivered in your format, with a provenance record for every item.
Review
Pull-request review
Line-level review of generated diffs for correctness, security and style.
Tasks
Task & test authoring
Realistic repository-level tasks with hidden tests and reference solutions.
Preferences
Pairwise code preferences
Which solution a senior engineer would merge, and why.
Security
Security review
Injection, leaked secrets, unsafe dependencies and auth mistakes, flagged by severity.
Vetting
Engineers you can check
Every engineer passes a recorded technical interview, scored and on record, before joining a project.
Typical outputs
- Graded trajectories
- Review comments
- Hidden test suites
- Pairwise JSONL
How vetting works
Every expert comes with the evidence.
Rather than a profile and a score, you get the record behind each person on your project, and you can review it before they start.
- Recorded AI video interview with the full transcript and a scored rubric
- ID and liveness check, with duplicate-account detection
- Credentials checked with the issuing body where the role needs them
- Integrity flags from the interview, shown to you in plain words
- Paid calibration against gold answers before any client work
How an engagement runs
From first call to scale, pilot first.
Scope
Tell us the task, the domain, the languages and your quality bar. We write the rubric with you.
NDA on requestMatch
We staff vetted experts whose field and language fit the task, and share their evidence packs.
Evidence per expertPilot
A 72-hour paid pilot on your real task, with gold items, dual review and agreement scores.
72 hours, paidScale
Scale on the model that suits you: hourly, per task or a managed pod. Free replacement throughout.
Free replacement
Related solutions
Often paired with this.
- Evaluate LLM evaluation Held-out test sets, rubric scoring and side-by-side comparisons by experts in your field.
- Train RLHF & preference data Pairwise preferences, rubric ratings, rewrites and reasoning traces from credentialed professionals.
- Safety Red-teaming & AI safety Adversarial probes and safety evaluations by domain experts and native speakers.
Get started
Tell us the gap. We'll scope the pilot.
Every engagement starts with a 72-hour paid pilot. We reply to every request within two business days.
Talk it through
A 30-minute call with the founding team. Bring the task, the domain and your quality bar.
Get a quote
Share the scope in two minutes: service, team size, languages, start date and budget band.