Vibe Coding Review for AI Generated Application Code | Anexia

In a review of AI-generated software, the focus is on the result, not on how it was created. We examine whether the application meets business requirements, controls access and handles errors in a traceable way. Quickly generated code can convincingly reproduce familiar patterns and still overlook important states or boundaries. Representative workflows are therefore tested in practice and linked to selected code paths.

In the vibe code assessment, we pay particular attention to authorisation, input validation, secrets, dependencies and data changes. Tests are also checked for their informative value: a test that merely repeats the existing implementation does not reliably protect against a business logic error. In the vibe coding review, we rank findings by impact and ease of remediation. Usable parts remain the basis for further work; problematic areas receive a concrete remediation proposal. The conclusion shows which prerequisites for productive use are met and which changes are still needed. In this way, the AI code review makes the current state of development technically assessable and creates a basis for responsible further development.

Scope of services for the vibe coding review

The agreed scope of the review of AI-generated software can include the following results: a code inventory, an architecture survey, security findings, a test analysis and a remediation plan. For every significant result, we define what it is for, who reviews it and in what form it is handed over. This allows development, operations and procurement to assess the same service. Vague umbrella terms in the proposal are replaced by concrete work packages.

The vibe code assessment also includes coordinating the necessary interfaces with your team. We clarify access, contacts and available testing options before the implementation steps concerned. Changes to the scope are described together with their impact on effort and sequence. This gives you a clear overview of delivered results, prerequisites that are still open and additional requests.

The key technical decision in the vibe coding review

What is assessed is the system that has actually been built. The share of AI-generated code alone says little about quality or commercial usability. In the AI code review, we document the relevant assumptions and justify the chosen variant. Significant alternatives are considered against the same business requirements. This makes later adjustments easier if load, data volumes or organisational responsibilities change.

A sound decision also takes maintainability and handover into account. In the review of AI-generated software, we examine which skills exist internally and what additional support is needed. Technical possibilities are thus linked to a realistic operating model. The client can see which tasks will recur regularly after the project and which decisions remain with them.

A working demo path can conceal missing tenant separation, exposed administration functions or insecure secrets management. In the vibe code assessment, we treat this point as a concrete question to be examined. A risk is linked to the affected process, its potential impact and a suitable measure. Where prerequisites are still missing, the statement remains explicitly open until the necessary investigation has taken place.

We check critical user roles, data access, error paths, dependencies and the repeatability of a complete build. In the vibe coding review, we record the starting situation, the tested configuration and the result. Acceptance relates to the agreed scope. Open limitations are documented visibly and assigned to a next step with a clear owner. This allows your team to distinguish between proven functionality, a deliberate decision and an assumption that is still unconfirmed.

Project example as an illustrative scenario

The following scenario is an illustrative example and not a customer reference. A young company has built a customer portal with a coding assistant and wants to connect its first business customers. In the vibe coding review, the functionality actually present would be examined first. A convincing user interface could conceal the fact that access rights are only checked in the browser or that customer data is not sufficiently separated in the backend.

In the AI code review, the team would examine critical workflows with different user roles and manipulated inputs. A user must not be able to retrieve other people's data, even through direct API calls. The build would have to be reproducible from the repository; required secrets and external services would need to be recorded. Tests would be checked to see whether they can actually detect incorrect behaviour. In addition, it would be necessary to examine which dependencies and data migrations the generated code requires and whether later changes are possible in a controlled way.

The result of the review of AI-generated software would be a well-founded assessment with prioritised corrections. It would include reproducible findings and a decision paper on keeping, selectively remediating or replacing individual parts. The origin of the code alone would not justify any of these options. The client would need to be able to see which risks prevent a production launch, which functions are already sound and which first remediation phase delivers a verifiable business benefit.

Our experience and our engineering approach

We combine custom software development with the technical tasks of introduction and further development. In the AI code review, we bring the perspectives of application, integration and operations into a shared workflow. Business requirements remain linked to the technical decisions. You work with a defined scope of services and traceable results.

Our experience should be concretely verifiable for your project. That is why, in a technical exchange, we explain how we investigate the relevant risks, which work results are planned and how your team can assess them. In the review of AI-generated software, we align the roles involved with your actual needs. Available references are presented with their respective project and company context; confidential customer details are not used as general marketing claims.

Effort for the review of AI-generated software

Code readability, missing tests, external services and the quality of the original requirements determine the depth of the review. We therefore calculate the vibe coding review on the basis of a defined scope and explicitly stated prerequisites. A first analysis step can make sense if essential technical information is still missing. Afterwards, work packages and acceptance criteria can be agreed on a more reliable basis.

The AI code review can be organised as a limited project, as joint implementation with your team or with subsequent support. Rights of use, access, documentation and responsibilities are clarified in the contract. Ongoing operating hours, response times and external consumption costs are separate agreements. This keeps it clear which services are provided once and which tasks recur regularly after the introduction.

Boundaries of the vibe coding review

The review is an assessment; the subsequent technical remediation is planned as a separate, prioritised scope. In the vibe code assessment, we set out this boundary in the proposal. Required additional services are included with their business rationale and are not silently assumed. This allows your team to plan for suitable internal skills and divide the overall work sensibly between the parties involved.