Hi Product Hunt, I'm Witchayut.

AI code editors are good at writing edits that look right. Whether the edit parses, whether its imports point anywhere, whether the tests still pass: you usually find that out after you've applied it. I built Aperture so the editor checks before you do.

Composer reads the code, posts a plan, and waits for you to click Build it. Edits arrive as staged diffs you keep or skip file by file. Nothing touches your files until you apply. Each staged change gets five checks: it parses, its imports resolve, the types check, the preview renders, and the project's tests run. A check that couldn't run says why. It never shows as a pass. If a test was already failing before the edit, Aperture says so and doesn't blame the edit.

The tests run in a sandboxed Worker in your browser tab with no network access, so they cost nothing and take about a second. It handles node:test, Vitest and Jest. A new failure goes back to the agent once to fix.

There's also a design mode: click an element in the preview to edit its CSS or the page's theme tokens. The demo plays recorded runs. To use a real model, self-host with your own key for Grok, OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, DeepSeek or a custom endpoint.

It's MIT-licensed. The demo asks you to sign in before you can run a plan. It plays back recorded runs, so it costs nothing. You can also run it locally in a minute without an API key; the commands are in the README.

What I'd like to hear:
- Do the checks catch the mistakes that actually bite you? What's missing?
- Where does the in-browser test runner fall over on your projects?
- Anything that confused you in the first five minutes.

Thanks for taking a look.

Aperture

An AI code editor that checks its own work

An AI code editor that checks its own work