Skip to main content
Greenfield Production Systems

The thesis

AI agents now write more code, faster, than any team can meaningfully review. The new code looks right when it’s right and looks right when it’s wrong; at this volume, review can’t tell which is which. In New Relic’s June 2026 State of AI Coding survey, 94% of technology leaders rated AI-generated code higher quality than human-written code at review; 78% reported more production incidents once it shipped. The industry calls that spread the verification gap (Sonar’s January 2026 State of Code: 96% of developers don’t fully trust AI-generated code, yet only 48% always verify it before committing), and the work accumulating inside it is what Werner Vogels calls verification debt.

The bottleneck in software was never generation. It’s verification: knowing what a system does, proving what changed, and deciding whether to believe a quality claim. We built machinery for that.

94%

rate AI code higher quality at review

78%

report more production incidents

New Relic, State of AI Coding — June 2026

Three doors

Start with your situation

Proof

Numbers with receipts

Every figure links into the evidence library and carries the tag the factory gave it: proven, traced in source, or probe candidate.

How it’s made

The factory

Work moves through tracks and stations with automated gates between them; what fails a gate doesn’t move forward. Every run leaves a transcript, and the line itself is versioned like a product.

  1. v1

    Built a production SaaS with an architect reviewing at stations that are now automated gates.

  2. v2

    Ported Bugzilla end to end autonomously, from services to frontend to e2e journeys.

  3. v3

    Verifies with typed provenance: every claim in the catalog cites file and line, and a gate checks the citation.

How the machine works

Tell us what you have. We’ll tell you what proof looks like.