Support for apps built with AI tools

We work with apps built with Cursor, Lovable, Bolt, Claude and similar AI coding tools, and we take the code in whatever state it is in; you do not need to clean it up first. The usual case is a product that already has real users, where every change seems to break something else and the AI tool has stopped helping.

We read the code, check security and dependencies, and send you a written report that ranks the risks by what they could cost you. From it you can see what is urgent, what can wait and what stabilizing the product would take, before you commit to any further work with us.

Rarely. We suggest a rewrite only when the audit shows it would cost less than fixing what is already there. Usually it is faster and safer to keep the existing product and improve it step by step: tests around critical parts first, then refactoring, while work on what your users need continues.

Yes. We start by adding tests around the parts that matter most, setting up CI and error monitoring and moving secrets out of the code. Refactoring then happens in small steps while the product stays live. Each change is verified before it reaches users, so problems do not first show up in their bug reports.

The most common are API keys in the frontend or the repository, open database rules and missing rate limits. These are typical of generated code and easy to miss because the app appears to work. The audit report lists what we find, ranked by the damage it could do, and stabilization fixes the most dangerous issues first.

Yes. Building this way is fine, and our engineers work with Cursor and Claude every day. What these projects usually lack is code review, tests and a person who owns each merge, and we add those. After stabilization we can keep building features, run hosting and support, or provide engineers who join your team.