Reliable AI Delivery System

Turn AI coding output into evidence-backed delivery

5 followers

Turn AI coding output into evidence-backed delivery

5 followers

A downloadable set of six Codex skills, ten test cases, and guides for AI coding work. It helps define scope, debug from evidence, verify acceptance criteria, and separate proven results from unverified claims before an agent says a task is done. Personal Founder Edition is sold through Gumroad for US$39.

Reliable AI Delivery System gallery image

Payment Required

Launch tags:Productivity•Developer Tools•Artificial Intelligence

Launch Team

Wispr Flow: Dictation That Works EverywhereStop typing. Start speaking. 4x faster.

Promoted

Maker

📌

Hi Product Hunt — I built Reliable AI Delivery System because I kept seeing AI coding agents sound confident before the work was actually proven. A build can pass while accessibility is still untested. A report can say “fixed” even when no file was changed. A handoff can look complete while the evidence is thin. This is a downloadable Codex skill system, not a cloud app. It includes one orchestrator plus five focused skills: - Reliable Work Start to lock the task target, scope, forbidden actions, and acceptance criteria - Scope Control to stop drift and call out work that needs fresh approval - Systematic Debugging Guard to debug from observed evidence instead of guesses - Evidence Acceptance to separate proven work from unverified claims - Reliable Delivery Report to produce a concise, reviewable handoff The v1.2 release includes ten test scenarios. Two of them use real disposable fixtures: one auth reset redirect regression and one export failure caused by a missing output directory. Both were reproduced, fixed, and retested with command output and diffs. The limits are intentional: this does not run work automatically, access credentials, guarantee defect-free code, or replace human engineering/security/legal review. It is meant to make AI-assisted delivery more controlled and auditable. I’d love feedback from people using Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, or other coding agents: where do your agents most often overclaim completion, and what evidence would make you trust a handoff more?

Report

2mo ago

Love that you're pushing agents to show their work instead of just claiming victory. One thing that would help me a lot: a small in-repo script or Makefile that automatically runs those ten test cases and prints a clean pass/fail summary, so I can drop it into any project and see verification results at a glance without re-reading the guides each time. Would make adoption way smoother.

Report

2mo ago

The acceptance criteria checklist actually made me realize how much hand-wavy "done" I had been accepting from my agent. Solid, practical pack.

Report

2mo ago

Reviews

Maker

📌

Report

2mo ago

Report

2mo ago

The acceptance criteria checklist actually made me realize how much hand-wavy "done" I had been accepting from my agent. Solid, practical pack.

Report

2mo ago