Make your legaltech AI safe enough to launch.

Legaltech AI should be evaluated against missing authorities, conflicting clauses, outdated documents, ambiguous questions, and requests that require professional judgment. A trustworthy workflow makes uncertainty visible and routes the right cases to a lawyer.

Yes. The review identifies the bugs, architecture gaps, deployment issues, monitoring gaps, and edge cases that could block a trustworthy release. Implementation is separately scoped.

Yes. It checks identity, authorization, tenant boundaries, RLS where relevant, secrets, sensitive data exposure, API abuse, and prompt or context manipulation when AI behavior is in scope. It is a bounded readiness review, not a penetration test.

Yes. A senior engineer traces the relevant code and configuration, then validates behavior against evidence, including hidden logic defects, unsafe migrations, weak permissions, retry failures, and duplicate actions.

Yes. We inspect existing tests, pull-request checks, CI/CD, staging, monitoring, deployment, and rollback controls that affect the reviewed journey. We do not implement every gap in the review fee.

Yes. APIs, webhooks, payments, CRM and automation workflows, document processing, agents, media pipelines, queues, retries, and recovery are checked when the critical journey depends on them.

Yes. The review is platform-agnostic and can inspect apps built with Lovable, Replit, Base44, Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, v0, Bolt, WordPress, or similar tools. Migration planning or implementation is separately scoped.

Yes, where it affects the reviewed journey. We check architecture, database design, reusable components, documentation, discoverability, platform lock-in, ownership, and the next developer's ability to make a safe change.

Yes, when they affect the launch journey. We check responsive behavior, loading, empty and error states, accessibility, SEO-critical surfaces, and launch-impacting product polish. A full redesign is outside scope.

AI Reliability Sprint is $4,500 for one defined workflow, with an optional $1,500 per month retainer. The final scope depends on the defined workflow, system access, evidence required, and agreed handover.

Citations are supported by the approved source set Conflicting or missing authority triggers review Matter, client, and privilege boundaries are tested The engagement should end with an explicit handover and a clear list of remaining risks, not a general claim that the AI is safe.

The sprint evaluates a technical workflow against supplied rules. It is not legal advice, professional-standards certification, or a guarantee of correctness.