Product Build · AI Developer Tooling

Every dev team is already using AI in their pipeline informally — almost none of them can show you the governance behind it.

Copilot suggestions and ad hoc ChatGPT use get code written faster, but leave no audit trail, no cost visibility, and no shared pattern the next engineer can reuse. The AI-SDLC Accelerator is a small, working tool that fixes that — a governed AI code-review and test-generation bot a team can plug into a pipeline they already have, in a day.

▶ Watch it run — live demo
Who

Dev teams already using AI coding tools ad hoc, and the engineering leads who have to sign off on making it official.

What

Get AI code review, test generation, and docs into CI — without giving up governance or cost visibility.

Why

One lightweight accelerator a team can adopt in a day, with the audit trail and model choice already built in.

Two workarounds, both broken

Everyone's already using AI — quietly

Engineers paste code into ChatGPT or Copilot on their own. No shared pattern, no audit trail, no way to tell whether it's actually saving time or quietly leaking proprietary code to a public API.

Governance stalls the rest

Security and compliance teams block AI tooling because nobody has shown them what "safe" looks like in practice — so pilots stay pilots and never become department-wide process.

What it's built to do

Inside the governance layer

"Guardrails and audit trail" was doing a lot of hand-waving in one bullet. Here's exactly what's caught and logged today, versus what a real production rollout would add next.

Built and running Production roadmap
Built and running now
  • Secret keys — AWS access keys, Stripe-style API keys, and generic password= / secret= / token= / api_key= assignments — redacted before the prompt is even builtMeasured
  • Email addresses (PII) redacted the same way, before anything reaches Claude or another LLMMeasured
  • Every model call logged to an audit trail — model, prompt version, what was redacted, tokens, cost, latencyMeasured
Production roadmap — what a real rollout would add
  • Broader PII coverage — phone numbers, physical addresses, national IDs, card numbersProduction target
  • File/path deny-list — never send .pem, .key, .env*, or secrets/** to any model, redacted or notProduction target
  • Model allow-list — only approved models and providers can be called from this pipeline at allProduction target
  • Per-team budget & quota enforcement, with rate limits so a runaway agent loop can't burn a month's spend in an afternoonProduction target
  • Chargeback reporting — spend attributed to the team/repo that generated it, not lumped into shared IT costProduction target
  • Human-in-the-loop gate — AI suggestions never auto-merge; a person always approves before anything shipsProduction target
  • Escalation path — a caught secret pages the team that leaked it, instead of a silent redaction nobody seesProduction target
  • Tamper-evident, write-once audit log for compliance-grade retentionProduction target
  • License/provenance scanning on AI-generated code, to catch verbatim copies of restrictively-licensed snippetsProduction target

What it delivers

3-in-1

pillars wired into one pipeline

prompt library + CI review/test-gen + governance layer

2–3

models benchmarked side by side

quality · cost · latency, logged per task

1 day

target onboarding time for a new team

playbook designed for handoff, no builder in the room

Status: in active build — this pitch describes the scope being delivered, not a finished case study yet.

How success gets measured

A pure usage number would look great even if ungoverned; a pure governance number would look great even with zero adoption. The North Star has to move both at once — everything under it is what proves the North Star is real, not asserted.

North Star Metric · one compound metric, not a set

Governed AI Actions Delivered per Week

The count of AI-assisted actions — reviews, test-gens, doc-gens — that ran in CI, passed the guardrails layer, and were accepted (merged without material rework). It can't rise from usage alone, and it can't rise from governance alone.

This is a production-scale metric — it only means something with real weekly traffic across teams, so this solo build doesn't have a live number to report against it yet.

Measured in this build Production target, not yet measured
Experimentation
  • Cost-per-request & cost-per-successful-outcome, per modelMeasured
  • Latency p50 / p95, per modelMeasured
  • Acceptance rate per model (self-graded on eval harness sample tasks)Measured
  • Model win-rate by task type, at volumeProduction target
Deployment
  • Time-to-first-value: install → first successful run on a demo repoMeasured
  • Coverage — % of PRs in onboarded repos triggering the botProduction target
  • Acceptance rate on real production trafficProduction target
  • Cost per team per week, vs. an all-frontier-model baselineProduction target
Governance
  • Guardrail catch rate (redaction test suite: known secrets/PII in, catch rate out)Measured
  • Audit coverage — % of test-run actions with a complete log entryMeasured
  • Zero-incident rate at production scaleProduction target
  • Budget adherence — % of team-weeks within quotaProduction target
  • Chargeback visibility — % of spend attributable to a specific team/repoProduction target

"AI in the SDLC shouldn't mean choosing between speed and governance — it should ship with both."