Founder workflow
You ship with coding agents
Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, or a custom harness is producing work faster than you can confidently review it.
Agent Run Reliability Diagnostic
Find where your coding-agent workflow stops being trustworthy.
I review one real workflow and one recent failed or risky run, then map the first three places it loses context, skips evidence, or needs an explicit stop line.
Three business days
One workflow
One recent run
$750 fixed scope
run.review
WORKFLOWAgent implements and prepares a feature for release
CONTEXTDecision history lives only in prior chat
PROOFTest result is claimed but not attached
STOP LINERelease action has no approval record
OUTPUTRisk map + 3 gates + reusable checklist
For teams already trusting agents with real work.
This is a narrow operational review, not another general AI strategy session.
Engineering workflow
Your team needs repeatable gates
Agent runs vary by operator, project context, evidence quality, or what a human remembers to check.
Internal tooling
You are expanding agent access
One workflow works for a few people, but you need explicit boundaries before broader rollout.
One report. Six useful sections.
The output is designed to change the next run, not become a strategy deck that nobody uses.
01
Workflow snapshot
What the agent was asked to do, what context it received, and which tools it used.
02
Context risk
Where state is missing, stale, hidden in chat, or unlikely to survive the next handoff.
03
Proof risk
Which claims, code changes, or handoffs are missing inspectable evidence.
04
Three stop lines
Explicit triggers, blocked actions, and the evidence required to continue.
05
Reusable checklist
A compact pre-run and pre-handoff checklist for the next workflow execution.
06
Optional next scope
An implementation recommendation only when the diagnostic exposes a repeatable system problem.
From scope to report in four steps.
No platform migration or long consulting engagement is required.
1
Confirm fit
Name the workflow, its owner, and the recent run that made you question it.
2
Confirm scope
Agree on the fixed boundary and pay before sharing workflow material.
3
Safe intake
Share a sanitized transcript, log, screenshot, or summary with a do-not-share list.
4
Receive the report
Get the risk map, three stop lines, and checklist within three business days.
Keep sensitive material out.
Start with the smallest sanitized artifact that still shows the workflow failure.
Credentials and API keys do not send
Customer-private data remove first
Public case study off by default
Workflow implementation separate scope
Know what this is not.
The diagnostic identifies workflow reliability risks. It does not certify safety.
Security audit not included
Penetration test not included
Model benchmark not included
BDH implementation not included
Fix the first unreliable surface before adding more autonomy.
Send a short description of the workflow and the failure that made you hesitate. I will confirm whether it fits the fixed diagnostic before any payment or intake.