Your best consultant. Working every night.
A one-off audit costs six figures and is stale the week the consultants leave. Checks reads your tickets, your commits and your AI spend every night, tells you which standards slipped, and what to do about each one.
Trusted by engineering teams
1 passing · 5 need attention
- 421
Commit unrelated to the ticket it references
navigaracom/vision · PR #2118
- 6612
Rubber-stamp review
navigaracom/vision · PR #2004
- 94
Epic with no stated customer or expected return
ENG-2884 · AI Analytics Integrations
- 143
Token spend with no delivery behind it
Anthropic · sprint 41
- 3138
Pull request open too long
navigaracom/vision · PR #1908
Your standards live in three systems. All three are ungoverned.
Break one link and the whole chain stops being provable. Checks reads all three every night, on read-only access, and reports what slipped.
Read-only · nightly
Intent
Jira
Intent
Linear
Execution
GitHub
Execution
GitLab
Cost
Anthropic
Cost
OpenAI
Checks
Runs nightly
High
Epic with no expected return
Warning
Rubber-stamp review
Info
Spend with no delivery
Why this exists. Who asked. What it is worth.
What actually shipped, and whether it matches the ticket.
What delivery cost in tokens, and what it returned.
What a broken chain looks like.
Every finding carries a severity, a location and an owner. These four are the ones that cost the most.
- High
Epic with no stated customer and no expected return
Intent with no purpose. Nobody can say later whether it was worth building.
- Warning
Ticket attached to no epic
Execution with no intent. Work happened and the roadmap never heard about it.
- Warning
Commit that has nothing to do with the ticket it references
The link is there. The audit trail behind it is fiction.
- Info
Token spend with no delivery behind it
Cost with no return. This is the line item finance asks about.
We did not automate the rules. We automated the reviewer.
No linter can decide that a review was rubber-stamped, or that a commit has nothing to do with the ticket it claims. That takes reading both sides and forming a judgment.
Agents do that nightly, across every repository and every board. Each finding has a severity, a location, an owner and a state.
The same discipline you already apply to bugs, applied to how the work gets done.
The defaults did not come from us.
They are what disciplined engineering orgs already enforce, codified with the engineering leaders and fractional CTOs who fix these problems for a living. You start on their judgment, not on a blank rule editor.
Day one
Our defaults run against your Jira, your repositories and your spend. Nothing to configure.
Week two
Your rules, your severities, your thresholds. Anything you disagree with, you change.
From then on
Your standards stop being a document nobody opens and start being something with a state.
Every rule, severity and threshold is yours to overwrite. If your team holds a standard we never thought of, it becomes a check.
Nobody can prove ROI on AI tooling. That is not an AI problem.
You cannot prove return on engineering until the process is clean enough to trace a dollar back to a decision. Sloppy process is not a hygiene problem. It is an attribution problem: the data exists, the links between it do not.
Roadmap delivery is the join. Trace a commit to a ticket, a ticket to a priority, and the dollar follows. Checks is what keeps that chain intact.
Every finding you close shows up in your ETV.
Checks is not a hygiene dashboard. A clean chain is the thing that makes performance measurable in the first place. As findings close, the link from a commit to a ticket to a priority holds, and ETV becomes a number you can put in front of a board.
Illustrative
That is the loop. Read the process, rank what slipped, fix the top of the list, and watch the metric move.
See Checks
on your data.
Read-only access. We point the framework at your Jira, your repositories and your AI spend, and walk you through the findings ranked by severity.
Read-only
No write access to any system.
On your infrastructure
Code never leaves your servers.
Findings, not a report
Ranked, located, assignable.