Quality engineering for AI-generated code

AI Is Writing More of Your Code Every Sprint. Someone Still Has To Prove It Works.

Your assistants ship more change every sprint than your test capacity was built for. Modenix verifies the change independently of every model that touched it, and every engagement ends in evidence, not an opinion you have to trust.

Release confidence, 200 runs
94.5%
200 Runs · 11 Outside Bounds · Gaps Named, Not Hidden
Illustrative. Your figure is computed from your own runs.
Within tested boundsOutside bounds, named gap
Since 2002
1,000+ Engagements
~1,000 QA engineers
40% Of new clients arrive by referral
4.8/ 5 17 independently verified reviews
The flagship service

Merge Assurance

Independent verification of AI-generated code, at the merge gate, before it reaches your main branch.

Your Coverage Went Up. Your Trust Went Down.

When the same assistant writes the implementation and the tests, the tests inherit the implementation's misunderstanding. Both are wrong in the same direction, the suite goes green, and the coverage number climbs while trust falls.

That is circular validation, and no AI code reviewer fixes it. Breaking it requires a verifier that is genuinely independent of the thing that wrote the code and knows what to look for. Ours runs on our own platform, built on thousands of test patterns our engineers identified over 25 years.

* JetBrains State of Developer Ecosystem · Stack Overflow Developer Survey

85%*
of developers use AI coding tools
33%*
trust the output

Why an AI code reviewer does not fix this

CIRCULAR Assistant writes the code Same assistant writes the tests Tests agree. Pipeline green. same blind spotCoverage rises. Trust falls. INDEPENDENT Assistant writes the code Human writes the specification A different model writes the testsDisagreement surfaces. That is the signal.

The loop on the left is why coverage and trust stopped moving together.

Start here, because most vendors won't

We Report Into Your Dashboard, on Your Metrics.


Your board wants numbers, not testimonials. So our engineers' output lands in the view you already use, beside your own business-unit averages: issues closed, PRs merged, rework rate, escaped defects.

If one of our people sits below your bar, you see it before we say it. Then you get the improvement trend or the replacement. It is an uncomfortable way to sell. Almost nobody does it.

Engineer signal, last 30 daysvs. your BU avg
Issues Closed1.18×avg
Story Points Completed1.12×avg
PRs Merged1.09×avg
AI-assisted Volume1.34×avg
Rework Rate (Lower is better)0.81×avg
Escaped Defects1.04×avg
Illustrative. Live reporting wires to your Jira, GitHub, and adoption telemetry.
What actually changed

The Bottleneck Moved. Most QA Vendors Are Still Selling to the Old One.


For as long as the industry has existed, the constraint on shipping software has been writing it. That constraint is gone. What's left is the harder half: knowing whether what's shipped is correct, safe, and within bounds.

Almost every testing firm still prices and staffs based on the old constraint: bodies per test case. We reorganized around the new one, which is why our unit of sale is a verified change rather than hours.

  • Then

    Writing code was slow, so you bought people to write and check more of it.

  • Now

    Code is cheap and abundant. Confidence is scarce and expensive.

  • Consequence

    Verification is the constraint on release velocity, and it is under-resourced almost everywhere.

  • What we sell

    Evidence, produced by named engineers who are measured on your own dashboard.

The Automated Check and the Human Disagree by 24 Points.

Source: METR, 296 AI-written PRs, blinded maintainer review.

Results

What Closing the Gap Produced.

+40%
Daily diagnostic throughput

Healthcare client, mid-migration, with manual testing effort down 75%.

65%
Faster QA execution

Global tire manufacturer. AI-augmented regression replacing a manual cycle.

+33%
Delivery, same team size

No added headcount. The gain came from where verification effort was spent.

Three ways in

Start Small. Nothing Here Requires a Program.

Tier 1 · No Cost

Verification Gap Diagnostic

Seven questions, two minutes. A scored read on where your gap is widest, an estimate of your unverified merge ratio, and what to fix first, on screen before we ask who you are.

Free · Instant · No Call
Tier 2 · Fixed Fee

Three-week Readiness Assessment

We measure change volume against verified change, find where coverage claims and production reality diverge, and hand you a costed 60–90 day plan you can take to a board.

Fixed Scope · Credited Against the First Three Months
Tier 3 · Talk First

Thirty Minutes With a QA Lead

An engineering lead is in the room, not just a salesperson. Bring the number you have to hit, and we will tell you whether it is reachable, including when it is not.

No Pitch · We Will Say if It Is Not a Fit