Platform-specific · 5 days · From $1,500
A senior read of your Cursor-accelerated codebase.
Cursor makes good engineers faster. It also makes patterns drift, tests pretend, and APIs hallucinate. We sit on top of your codebase for a week and tell you, plainly, where Cursor served you and where it cost you.
Who this is for
Teams shipping fast with Cursor — who want a sanity check.
Most of our Cursor audits are for technical teams that have already shipped.
Small eng team
1–3 engineers, heavy Cursor usage
You've shipped a real product, and the codebase has grown faster than your review process. Time for an outside read.
Pre-Series-A
Investor DD on the horizon
Investors will look at code quality. We give you a credible report — and the chance to fix things before they ask.
Solo / heavy AI
You're the only engineer, mostly prompting
Cursor + Claude Code is your team. You want a senior to verify what you've built, monthly or before milestones.
What we check (Cursor-specific)
Where Cursor codebases drift.
In addition to standard correctness and security review.
- Pattern consistency. Same problem solved three different ways across files — we map and unify.
- Hallucinated APIs. Functions called that don't exist on the version you're pinned to.
- Type safety. any creep, @ts-ignore trails, ambient types that aren't.
- Tests that test nothing. Snapshot-only assertions, mocks that pre-bake the answer.
- Architecture coherence. Where the seams are. Where they should be.
- .cursor/rules & .cursorrules. Your global prompts. We read them like code.
- Dead code & orphan files. AI is good at writing code, less good at deleting it.
- Dependency choices. Why this package? Is it maintained? Is it overkill?
- Auth, secrets, RLS. Same checks as the general audit. Cursor doesn't get a pass.
- Error handling. Try/catch eating errors silently is a Cursor classic.
- Performance. N+1 queries, unbounded loops, dropped indexes.
- Build & CI. Whether the pipeline catches what humans don't.
Red flags
Patterns we see in Cursor codebases weekly.
Most are fixable in a hardening sprint.
Auth checks done in three different ways
Some routes use middleware. Some check inline. Some forget. Inconsistency is how leaks happen.
"Working" features that don't have tests
The PR shipped because it ran. We unify test scaffolding and write the missing critical-path tests.
API calls to functions that don't exist
Cursor invented the function name and TypeScript was too permissive to catch. Production-only crash.
Three competing utility files
utils.ts, helpers.ts, lib/util.ts. Same functions, slightly different. Pick one.
No .cursorrules or rules are vague
Your rules are your prompt. Vague rules make Cursor drift. We rewrite them based on what we see.
Comments that explain bad code
Long comment apologizing for the code below. The comment is correct; the code should be different.
Deliverables
What lands on Friday.
Same shape as the general audit, with a Cursor-rules rewrite.
Founder & tech-lead summary
Two pages: one for the founder, one for whoever runs the engineering side.
Risk register
8–18 findings, severity-graded, with the fix and the prompt to give Cursor.
.cursorrules rewrite
A revised rules file based on what we found. Drop in, commit, watch the next prompts go better.
90-min walkthrough
Live call with you and your engineers. We pair-walk the highest findings.
Pricing
From $1,500 · 5 working days · Larger monorepos quoted separately
FAQ