Judges every subagent result
When an orchestrator fans work out to subagents, QSI reviews each result independently — so a confident-but-wrong edit does not slip through just because it looked plausible.
Agentic coding governance
Governance for AI that writes your code.
In Cursor-like environments, an orchestrator delegates to subagents that write code, run tests, and edit files. QSI is the governance layer that reviews what they produce — flagging the results that need a human before they merge.
loading scenario…
What it does
Three jobs, one governance plane.
The agent does the building. QSI does the judging — and tells you which of its outputs you can ship and which one needs your eyes.
Flags uncertainty for a human
The results QSI is unsure about are surfaced with a calibrated confidence and a reason. Your reviewers spend their attention exactly where it matters, not on everything.
Verifies task completion
Beyond "is this correct," QSI checks "did the subagent actually do what it was asked" — did it complete the plan, touch the right files, call the required functions.
The agentic-coding problem
More autonomy means more confident wrong answers.
As agents take on more of the work, the bottleneck moves from writing code to trusting it. A subagent will report success on an edit that quietly breaks an edge case. QSI catches that — and it does it fail-open, so it never blocks an agent that is doing fine.
Surfaces what needs a human
Instead of reviewing every diff, your engineers review the handful QSI flags. The rest pass with a verdict attached, so you keep the speed of agents without inheriting their blind spots.
Govern your coding agents — keep the speed, lose the blind spots.
See QSI judge a real agentic-coding run and flag the result that needs review.