Agentic Coding Audit
Answer 21 questions about one coding workflow to identify gaps in context, permissions, checks, and ownership, then choose a focused next improvement.
Take the Agentic Coding AuditWhat it examines
Seven dimensions between access and dependable use.
The audit surfaces the conversations a tool rollout often skips. It is a starting point for team decisions, not a certification.
Outcomes / task boundaries
Is the outcome clear, and is the agent’s job bounded well enough to review?
Context / specifications
Which requirements, conventions, sources, and data define a good result?
Environments / permissions
Where may the agent work, and what may it read, change, run, or publish?
Verification / evaluations
Which named checks expose correctness, regressions, and known limitations?
Human review / ownership
Who understands the work well enough to approve and support the result?
Orchestration / handoffs
How do agents, tools, and people pass context and responsibility without losing the thread?
Cost / observability
Can the team see usage, latency, spend, failures, and the evidence behind a decision?
Evidence note
Built is not the same as proven.
The audit is an inspectable artifact. This page does not claim a verified live deployment or an externally supported business outcome. Those states should only change when the corresponding evidence exists.
For team decisions
Turn your findings into a next step.
Review one workflow with me and get a written set of priorities, recommended changes, and criteria for checking the result.
Explore a workflow review