We write code with teams of AI agents working in parallel, and pass every task through a spec, plan and review path: the speed of agents with the discipline of method.
Agents Bring the Speed. Method Makes Sure It Isn't Wasted.
We build software with teams of AI agents. Claude Code and Codex agents work in separate checkouts on parallel branches, moving different tasks forward at the same time — in Motice alone, 34 branches belong to agents. Work a team would queue for weeks moves forward on the same day.
But speed is not a value on its own. Every task follows the same path: the idea is clarified and a design spec is written, a step-by-step implementation plan is produced, the plan passes a review agent, and then agents implement it test-first. "Where we left off" lives in the orchestrator handoff note in Linear, and the coding agents are connected to our company AI brain, so they know the decisions the company has made.
How It Works
Spec → plan → plan review → test-first implementation
Claude Code and Codex agents working at once on parallel branches
Orchestrator handoff and agent pre-estimates through Linear
Agents connected to company memory that know company decisions
More than 260 spec, plan and review documents in Motice alone
What It Means for You
Shorter delivery times — with software whose every step is written down and every decision explained. Speed is never borrowed from quality.
Where We Use It
Across all our active projects, including Motice, the YEE platforms, Hardiye, APEX and this website.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
A quality system where whoever prepares the work cannot approve it, and every change passes independent review and thousands of tests.
Whoever Prepares the Work Cannot Approve It.
Speed is only worth something if the gates are sound. Every plan passes a review agent, and every change passes an independent review. Mistakes caught in past reviews become a pattern library — tenant isolation, migration rollback, permission gaps, the AI risk gate — and the next review starts from those patterns. The same mistake does not slip through easily twice.
Tests are the gate itself. In Motice, 799 unit and 131 end-to-end test files run on every change; in Keyperties, 811 core and 134 end-to-end tests. Some tests guard the rule rather than behaviour: a single table missing its tenant policy, or a single AI tool carrying an identity field, breaks the build. In YEE CMS, agents plan, write and repair the end-to-end tests when they break, and screen changes are caught by visual regression.
How It Works
A plan review agent and independent code review
A review pattern library fed by the mistakes it has caught
Test-first development; thousands of unit and end-to-end tests
Tests that guard rules: tenant isolation, AI tool schemas
Agents that plan, write and repair tests; visual regression
What It Means for You
Mistakes are caught at the gate, not by your users. The speed gained with agents is not paid back in regressions.
Where We Use It
Motice, Keyperties, YEE CMS and the YEE exam platform.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
A release pipeline where every branch is a release stage, gates harden with each stage, and nothing moves to production on a red gate.
On a Red Gate, Nothing Moves to Production.
Every long-lived branch is a release stage: development, stage, production. Gates harden with the stage — a light gate of about 3 minutes on every PR, 12 minutes with tests on the development branch, 20 minutes with end-to-end tests on stage, and release only on production. End-to-end tests run after merge, on the exact tree that will be released, and image steps depend on its green. That the code entering production is identical to the code that passed stage is verified by measurement.
The pipeline is tested too: if the lane a job runs in changes but the rule table does not, a test fails. Every job is born with its own isolated database; the build cache is an accelerator, not a gate — if it is corrupt, the system rebuilds. No branch accepts direct pushes. We measure the gates as well: Motice's PR gate went from 13.7 minutes to 0.6.
How It Works
Branch = release stage: development → stage → production
Four CI lanes that harden with the stage, each with a target time
End-to-end tests on the release tree; release tags that don't move on red
A self-testing pipeline: lane rules are fail-closed
Isolated test databases; gate times that are measured and cut down
Production monitoring, a rollback path and gradual rollouts
What It Means for You
Frequent, calm releases. If a version causes trouble, the way back is ready; the code in production is exactly the code that was tested.
Where We Use It
Motice's release pipeline, Hardiye's automated release pipeline in Frankfurt and the stage releases of YEE CMS.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
Engineering that treats security as the first design decision, not the last check — separating customer data at the database level and recording every critical change in a tamper-evident log.
Security Is an Architectural Decision, Not a Scan Report.
On our enterprise platforms the target is OWASP ASVS Level 2. Authorization is checked on the server on every request, with "no" as the default; a dynamic security scan runs before release, and work is not done until the findings are closed. Customer data is separated in the database itself, not in application code: the application connects with a role that cannot bypass that separation, and a single table missing its policy breaks the build.
In identity, detail is everything: two-factor secrets are stored encrypted, session tokens rotate on every use and reusing a stolen token revokes the entire session family, and emergency access is controlled and logged. Uploaded files are not let in until they pass quarantine and a virus scan. Critical changes are written to hash-chained audit logs that can be verified after the fact.
How It Works
OWASP ASVS Level 2 target and a security scan before release
Database-level customer isolation with a coverage test
A system that does not flinch at audits, data-protection reviews or your own customers' security questionnaires. The answer to "who changed what, and when" is always ready.
Where We Use It
Hash-chained audit in the YEE exam platform and the Turkish Art Platform; database-level isolation in Motice, Keyperties and Mentorual.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
End-to-end traceability that shows which request every line of code came from, which test it passed and which decision shaped it.
Every Line of Code Has a Reason. Every Reason Has a Record.
The most expensive question in any project is "why was this done this way?". We tie the answer to a chain: customer request → requirement → use case → screen and API → work item → code and build → test → customer acceptance → release. Work is managed in Linear as work package, capability epic and actionable task; a task without acceptance criteria is not considered ready for development.
Decisions are recorded: which option was chosen and why, and which questions are still open. Every agent task leaves an evidence document — what was done, which tests ran, which risks remain. A "done" status is never evidence on its own; test, customer acceptance and release evidence are kept separately.
Engineering where the rules, decisions and plans we write for agents become a ready handbook for your team at the end of the project.
A Rule Written for an Agent Is a Handbook for Your Team.
Working with agents has an unexpected side effect: for an agent to work correctly, everything has to be written down. Architectural invariants, forbidden shortcuts, "read before touching the code" lists, skills for recurring work — all of it lives inside the repository. The same file is an instruction for the next agent and an onboarding guide for a developer joining your team.
The reasoning behind every important decision sits in architecture decision records, and every task's spec and plan stay in the archive. The product guide and glossary are updated in the same pull request as the code that changes the screen. When the project ends, you are left not just with code but with an archive explaining why it was written that way — whether you continue with us or with your own team.
How It Works
Architectural rules read by agents and humans alike
Skills for recurring work, shared by every agent
Architecture decision records and their reasoning
A spec, plan and review archive for every task
A product guide and glossary updated in the same pull request as the code
What It Means for You
You are never locked in. Whoever takes over your software knows where to start, and which rule must not be broken and why.
Where We Use It
Motice, YEE CMS, APEX, Hardiye and this website.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
Engineering built around code that cannot be rolled back once live: smart contract development with specification, testing, independent review, staged release and key management.
Code Written to the Chain Cannot Be Rolled Back. Verification Ends Before Release.
In ordinary software a bug is fixed in the next release; in a smart contract it is often permanent, and it means a direct loss of money or rights. So we apply the quality gates from the rest of our work to smart contracts on a stricter setting. Every contract starts from a written specification; its invariants and permission model are fixed before any code is written. Alongside unit tests, fuzzing, invariant tests and static analysis run. No one approves their own contract.
Release is staged too: local network, testnet, then mainnet with limited permissions. Admin keys never sit with one person; they are protected by multisig and a timelock. For upgradeable contracts, the upgrade path is designed up front. Events from the live contract are monitored, and unexpected activity is escalated for human approval. For critical contracts we recommend an independent external audit as part of the plan.
How It Works
Specification, invariants and permission model before code
Unit, fuzz and invariant tests; static analysis at the quality gate
Independent code review: no one approves their own work
Local network → testnet → mainnet staged release
Multisig, timelock and an upgrade path designed up front
Live contract monitoring and event-based alerts
What It Means for You
Code written for an environment where nothing can be undone, by people who know it. What your contract does, who can change what, and what happens in an incident are settled before release.
Bring this capability to your project
Let's talk through your needs and map the right setup and delivery plan together.
