Your AI built it.
We tell you the truth about it.
Anyone on the internet can delete any user's recipe — there's no check that the recipe belongs to the person calling this. This is the #1 bug I find in AI-generated apps. Here's the 3-line fix: …
Real senior developers · not another AI wrapper
Connect your GitHub repo and get an instant, brutally honest 0–100 score. Then a vetted senior developer reads your code line by line — security, architecture, even whether the product itself makes sense — and tells you exactly what to fix before you launch.
01 — The uncomfortable truth
Works in the demo
AI code almost always runs. That's the trap — 'it works' and 'it's safe to launch' are different claims, and only one of them is visible to you.
Invisible time bombs
Hardcoded keys, missing auth checks, delete-anything endpoints. A senior developer spots them in minutes. Your users' data pays for them later.
Nobody to ask
You can't evaluate your own code — that's the whole point of vibecoding. We're the senior developer you don't have on the team.
02 — Coverage
Not just the code. Everything.
You pick what the review covers. Vibecoders don't just need a linter with opinions — they need someone to judge the product like an experienced founder-engineer would. Every area gets a score, a justification, and a way forward.
“Fix the auth issues before anything else — the rest can wait until you have users.” — your reviewer
Security
Auth gaps, exposed secrets, injection paths, who-can-touch-what.
Architecture
Will this survive real users, or collapse at the first feature request?
Code quality
Duplication, dead files, error handling, the stuff AI silently skips.
Data model
Schema design, indexes, the queries that will melt at scale.
Idea & product
Honest take on the concept: what's strong, what's missing, what to build next.
UX & CTAs
Do your flows convert, or do users bounce at step two?
SEO
Metadata, indexability, whether Google can even find you.
Branding & copy
Does it read like a product people trust with a credit card?
03 — Process & pricing
How it works
- 1
Connect GitHub
Pick the repo you built with Cursor, Bolt, Lovable, Claude — read-only access, only the repos you choose.
- 2
Free instant score
Our analyzer (static checks + AI judgment) scores security, structure, hygiene, SEO and more — with a breakdown of exactly why.
- 3
Pick scope & budget, pay upfront
Choose what to cover and what it's worth to you. Money is held until delivery — full refund if nobody claims it.
- 4
Senior review, delivered in-platform
Line-by-line comments on your actual code, a scorecard per area, and a prioritized fix list. Reply in threads, work through it like a checklist, rate your reviewer.
You see your reviewer's progress task by task — no black box.
You set the budget
Your budget is your call — pick any amount from $29 to $1,500. There's no menu of what each price buys, because nobody can size a review honestly without seeing the code. Your reviewer reads your actual repo first, then tells you what your budget covers — or quotes you before doing anything.
How far your budget goes depends on
Size, languages, tech stack, how tangled it is — 50,000 messy lines take more senior time than a tidy weekend project.
Security and architecture need more senior (more expensive) eyes than UX or copy feedback.
“Just the top risks” is the priciest ask — an expert has to read everything to know what the top risks are.
04 — Recognize yourself
Sound familiar?
“I'm actually a developer — and my vibecoded side project still got away from me.”
You know how to code. But the AI moved faster than your judgment: performance issues crept in, every fix made the codebase messier, and untangling it started feeling hopeless. What you're missing isn't skill — it's the super-senior colleague who looks over your shoulder, points at the three structural decisions causing everything, and shows you how to prompt your way out instead of deeper in.
That colleague is who reviews your repo.
“Agencies quoted me $10k+. AI built it for nothing — and now no developer will touch it.”
You finally built the app you'd been sitting on for years. But with zero programming background, it grew into an everything-app: features piled on, security and structure ignored, and the developers you tried to hire for the next phase declined the moment they saw the code. A review tells you what to cut, what to fix, and in what order — until the codebase is something a senior developer will actually agree to work on.
That cleanup roadmap is the review.
05 — Proof
What people say after their review
Every quote below is a real rating left in-platform by a customer after their review was delivered. Shown anonymously.
“Great reviewer! You can tell he loves what he does. He even hopped on Discord with tips and tricks that'll save me a ton of money. Got help with SEO, branding, and code review. He even shared links to help me understand my vision better and get the AI to build things right from now on. I'll be back for more reviews as I add features!”
“I ran fnScore just to see how the app I'm so proud of was actually doing behind the curtain, turns out I'd missed a ton of stuff. So I requested help from a senior dev, and honestly, I'm truly thankful. He told me not to be scared because even devs at big companies vibecode now, they just follow a few important rules (which he shared with me). It's all about keeping the right things in mind so you avoid rookie mistakes. My code was a mess, but with his guides and prompts, I spent my last tokens fixing the structure and security holes. Thank god nobody had gotten into my database yet.”
The score is free — the honesty comes standard.
Reviewed by people who've shipped.
Every reviewer is a working senior developer, vetted the way you'd vet a hire — portfolio, interview, test review. Your code is accessed read-only, never stored beyond the analysis, and never used to train anything. We say what's wrong even when it's uncomfortable — that's what you're paying for.