ReinforcedAI
INDEPENDENT, INTENT-BASED CODE VERIFICATION

Ship code you can actually stand behind.

Before every release you ask the same question: is this safe to ship? We give you a verified answer, backed by proof, not a passing badge — built to empower the release manager who has to stand behind the decision.

Get a free review

Not safe to ship

2 confirmed bugs. Fix before release.

Critical

Account takeover after a key change

High

Access without full payment

Know what blocks the release

client = connect(running_project)
result = client.register(funded_user)

assert result.access_granted
assert result.paid == result.quoted_price

Assertion failed. Access was granted after a partial refund.

Reproduce it in the running project

Documentation
Access is granted only after the full price is paid.
Disagrees with
Implementation
refund(payment.excess)grant_access(user)

Verify against your product's rules

Scope
Whole projectChanges only
Depth
QuickStandardThorough

Choose what to verify

$2B+
System verified in a single engagement
39
High & Critical issues found after all other reviews passed
20.5%
False-positive rate, vs. 80% typical AI benchmark

Four advantages that compound together

Verification of business intent vs. implementation

We build an adversarial test plan from the knowledge base of what your software is supposed to do, and verify the implementation against your actual business needs that are used to customize the reviews to your system.

Independently verified, every step

We've overcome dozens of limitations that AI verification brings, so you don't have to. Specialized agents, orchestrated through a process refined across real-world software products, work every use case systematically for deep, reliable edge-case coverage.

Real issues, far fewer false alarms

We consistently surface issues that standard QA, scanners, and AI tools miss, even in code that's already passed prior audits. Every finding is reproduced before it reaches you, keeping false positives far below industry norms.

Less trust, more truth

Structured findings, artefacts, and a data trail give your team detailed transparency, so it spends its time acting, not triaging. Deeper scrutiny, at a fraction of the time.

From your requirements to a verdict, in a day

01

Onboarding

Build the knowledge base from your documentation, architecture, and codebase.

02

Requirements vs. code

Map where intent and implementation diverge.

03

Adversarial test plan

Tests built from what your system should do, not how it happens to be built.

04

Review & validate

No mocks, no fakes. Every suspected bug is proven real.

05

Verdict

A structured, severity-ranked report and artefacts that help you act.

THE CHALLENGE

Speed solved writing. It didn't solve knowing what's correct.

Testing has always needed two things: a way to search for problems, and someone to decide what "correct" actually means for this code. The searching part has gotten faster and cheaper — first with automated tests, now with AI. The deciding part hasn't. It has always come from whoever understood the intent behind the code, and as more code ships faster than any one person can hold that intent in their head, that decision is the part nobody has actually solved for.

Read the full argument →
THE LANDSCAPE

The tools you already use weren't built to answer this.

They're valuable because they're fast at searching for problems. None of them are built to decide what "correct" means for your product — that still requires understanding intent.

Static scanning and PR code review
What it does

Flags known problems. Judgment-based verification.

Why it isn't enough

Gives fast feedback on a pull request, from code style to obvious bugs. It doesn't establish whether the system as a whole behaves as intended.

Test generation and self-healing tests
What it does

Automates repeatable tests — including AI-assisted test writing and fuzzing/property-based testing.

Why it isn't enough

Only checks against whatever behaviour someone already thought to encode — as complete as a person's memory of the spec, not the spec itself.

Stateful autonomous testing
What it does

Checks against the working solution.

Why it isn't enough

Quality of the solutions in this category is rapidly progressing, but we're yet to see one that checks against the business intent or is customizable.

Full landscape breakdown →

We verified a system moving hundreds of billions of dollars — after everyone else had already reviewed it.

Across seven independent scans covering major releases and features, we found what internal testing, code review, and prior audits had already missed.

Economic loss — state-consistency bug

A balance-transfer operation moved value but left a dependent tracking pointer unchanged — a slow, compounding loss that was invisible without intent-level verification.

Ownership takeover — authorization bug

An identity-swap operation checked the source account but never verified the destination — opening a path to hostile takeover of a privileged account.

Read the full case study →

A verdict you can act on, not another report to triage.

See what blocks the release, who can trigger it, and what the damage is.

ReinforcedAI

Not safe to ship

Two confirmed bugs allow account takeover and registration without full payment. Address both before releasing this version.

Needs to be addressed

Critical A stranger can take over an account after a key change

Who
Any user who claims the account before its owner recovers it.
Damage
The owner loses control. Other users with money in the account cannot withdraw until someone claims it.
Full report →
High Users get full access without paying the full price

Who
A user with enough money to cover the initial price, under the affected payment settings.
Damage
The system collects less than it should. The user's security deposit is also too small to provide the intended protection.
Full report →

Two ways to use ReinforcedAI

Standalone solution

INFRASTRUCTURE

Deploy ReinforcedAI on your own infrastructure and choose the models you use.

ON-DEMAND VERIFICATION

Your team runs verification on demand and sets the scope of each review.

ACCESS AND OWNERSHIP

You control access to your code and data, and retain ownership of your code and all verification results.

Verification as a service

INFRASTRUCTURE

Ours — you share docs, data, and code, we set up the environment. Yours — a VM with your docs, data, and code, we set up and run there. See how we handle your code and data →

INPUTS

Documentation; data (chats, samples, etc.); code and tests; feedback on early reviews to tune accuracy.

COVERAGE

Full product review; differential review; custom automation for ongoing reviews.

Limited availability — free review

If you want an independent, no-cost read on what your review process might be missing, we'd like to talk.

Claim a free review