- We built it with AI tools. Are you going to tell us to throw it away?
- Usually not. AI-generated code is often a reasonable starting point with predictable gaps — security, error handling, tests and data integrity. We build with agents ourselves; the difference is a senior engineer reading every line. We keep what earns its place.
- How bad does a codebase have to be before you refuse it?
- We rarely refuse, but we do occasionally recommend a rewrite instead of a rescue. That recommendation comes with the reasoning and the numbers, so it is your call rather than ours.
- Why is the audit paid?
- A real audit means reading the code, running it, and probing the security and data handling — days of senior work. It is credited against the build if you continue with us.
- Can you work with our existing developer?
- Yes, and it is often the cheapest path. We handle architecture and the hard parts while your developer keeps context and picks up the routine work.
- We don't have documentation or the original team. Now what?
- Standard. The audit reconstructs how the system actually behaves from the code, the database and the deployment — no original authors required.
- How long before we can show something to customers?
- Most rescues reach a demonstrable, deployed state within the first two weeks, because security and reliability work is sequenced ahead of new features.
- Our AI feature works in the demo and falls over in production. Is that this?
- That is the most common rescue we run. The fix is almost never a better prompt — it's evaluation, retrieval quality, error handling and cost control, which is unglamorous work that nobody did the first time.
- What if the previous team left security holes?
- Expect it — leaked keys, missing authorisation checks and unvalidated input are the usual findings. They are flagged in the audit and fixed first.