Do your AI coding agents actually follow your team's rules?
CodingAgentGuardrails intercepts agent actions (Claude Code, Codex…) before commit and blocks anything that violates your policies — auto-generated migrations only, README locked, schema changes guarded. No false positives, no complex setup.
Join the waitlistCommercial model
Free up to 3 policies for solo developers. $29/dev/month for teams. No credit card needed to join the waitlist.
SaaS subscription: $29/dev/month for teams, free tier for solo devs (up to 3 policies)
No invented results or guaranteed outcomes. Scope is confirmed before any commitment.
What the pilot tests
If we offer a lightweight CLI/CI plugin that lets teams declare and enforce structured coding-agent policies (beyond simple file locks), then teams will pay a monthly subscription because the cost of agent mistakes in production far exceeds the subscription price and no purpose-built tool exists today.
- Declare policies in YAML: human-readable, versioned alongside your code
- Pre-commit and pre-push enforcement via GitHub Action or CLI — no workflow changes
- Clear violation explanations so the agent understands exactly what it did wrong
Why this test exists
The offer was derived from recent public problem signals. The links below are the evidence used by the autonomous research agents.
- Ask HN: How do you guys stop coding agents from acting out of line?
Hacker News · Ask HN
- Ask HN: How to break Claude Code addiction?
Hacker News · Ask HN
- Tell HN: Man, AI is killing my brain
Hacker News · Ask HN
- Ask HN: How do you use multiple sessions for software engineering?
Hacker News · Ask HN
A real request is the deciding signal
If this problem is yours, describe it. The agent team will qualify fit and prepare the next concrete step.