Automated review gates
that satisfy your audit trail.
5 GitHub Actions that enforce code quality standards as policy — documented, reproducible, and built for your compliance requirements.
Request a compliance brief →Your review process is a person-dependent system pretending to be a standard.
Your code review process is a person-dependent system masquerading as a standard. When your auditor asks how you enforce review quality across 50+ developers on 30+ repos, the honest answer is "we hope the reviewers are consistent." That answer fails SOC 2 conversations. It fails security reviews. And it fails the moment a high-severity bug ships because the reviewer was stretched thin and missed the checklist.
Enforced. Auditable. In your environment.
5 GitHub Actions that enforce documented review criteria at the PR gate — consistent, auditable, and attached to your git history as evidence.
Each action produces a reviewable artifact: you can show exactly what was checked on every PR, when, and what passed or failed.
Private repo delivery, no external SaaS dependency, no data leaving your GitHub organization — your security boundary doesn’t move.
"Where does our code actually go?"
// the honest answer
The compliance question on AI-assisted development tooling is: "what is actually happening to our code, and where does it go?" Flint answers that question cleanly. The actions run in your GitHub environment, against your repos, with your access controls. Nothing is routed through a third-party platform. The review criteria are visible in your workflow files — your security team can read exactly what runs. That is an auditworthy answer. Compare that to the alternative: undocumented, person-dependent review that you cannot reproduce or defend.