AI in your engineering team · Build
AI in your engineering team without a code review bottleneck
We bring Claude Code into your team’s daily work, and automated checks take the routine half of review. On a team of twelve, throughput rose an estimated 50%.
EngagementHourly · remote
Hours9–18 CET · 4 h overlap
StackClaude Code · pre-commit hooks · CI
Proof2 case studies
The service in 4 parts
01 · Who it’s for
A team that has started using AI and found that code review became the bottleneck, or one that wants to start without the codebase getting worse.
02 · What we’ve built
- A US marketplace with a team of twelve, where throughput rose by roughly 50% once the rules ran before commit and in CI. The figure is estimated from ticket cycle time.Case study 03 →
- In our own design system, a generated change that breaks one of its conventions fails the build, because about 2,450 lines of verification code check them.Case study 01 →
- Six confident errors in one afternoon of AI-assisted research, and the habits that caught them.Blog post →
03 · How we work
01 · RULES FIRSTYour standards become automated checks first, and AI goes into daily use only once those checks run on every change.
02 · CYCLE TIMEWe compare cycle time before and after, using data you already have, because a team’s sense of its own speed is unreliable.
03 · HUMAN REVIEWA person still checks what no tool can: the assumptions behind generated code and every claim the AI makes about your system.
04 · Stack
Claude Codepre-commit hooksCIESLintTypeScriptFigma
Proof
Where we’ve done this before
Case study 03 · Platforms~50%A US marketplace with a team of twelve, where throughput rose by roughly 50% once the rules ran before commit and in CI. The figure is estimated from ticket cycle time.Read the case study →Case study 01 · Platforms74 / 678In our own design system, a generated change that breaks one of its conventions fails the build, because about 2,450 lines of verification code check them.Read the case study →WritingThe biggest fool: six confident AI errors in one afternoonSix confident errors in one afternoon of AI-assisted research, and the habits that caught them.Read the post →
FAQ
Questions about this service
Not by itself. It moves work from writing code to reviewing it, and if your team already waits on review, more code makes the wait longer. On the marketplace, the speedup came after the checks were in place.
It is our estimate from ticket cycle time, and we did not run a controlled test. In a controlled study by METR, experienced developers felt faster and were measured 19% slower, so treat self-reported speed with care, including ours.
In areas your team knows well, where it drafts faster than people write and the team spots its mistakes at once. Outside that knowledge, nobody can tell a good answer from a bad one.
Claude Code for daily work, with design connected to Figma. The checks around the tool matter more than which tool it is.
Next step
Describe the problem and we’ll come back with three options.
The first call takes 30 minutes, and you’re under no obligation.