For teams about to launch an agent that can browse, call tools,
update SaaS records, send messages or touch customer data. Get a
clear launch decision, standards-mapped risks and a fix plan for
one real workflow.
Send redacted screenshots, configs or a short demo flow. I review
one workflow and tell you whether to ship, ship after fixes, or
stop until a high-risk gap is closed.
Launch verdict: ship, fix first, or stop
Top 5 risks with evidence and severity
Exact fixes and retest steps
Tool permission and approval-gate inventory
OWASP Agentic, OWASP LLM and NIST AI 600-1 mapping
Copy-paste remediation tickets for the first fixes
Priority sequence for the first engineering fixes
Short customer/security note you can reuse
One first-fix retest reply within 7 days
Self-serve
Template pack
Checklist, intake form, report template, risk matrix and sample
report for reviewing your own AI-agent workflow.
Markdown checklist
Client intake template
Risk matrix CSV
Sample mini-audit report
Agency bundle
Two workflow handoff QA
For agencies with more than one client handoff. Review two
redacted AI-agent, voice/chat or automation workflows and get a
consolidated note you can reuse in delivery.
Two launch-readiness notes
First fix and retest criteria per workflow
Reusable client-safe handoff note
One consolidated agency pattern summary
Low-friction entry
Contact form proof check
A USD 29 first yes for founders, agencies and builders who want
quick proof that one public contact, demo, audit or intake form
has a real submit path before they send more traffic to it. Use
the USD 50 two-form pack when a launch has two public forms and
you want notes, developer-ready tickets and one first-fix retest.
Free risk self-check before buying
One public contact/intake funnel
Two-form pack available at USD 25 per form
Endpoint and visible-state evidence
Developer-ready issue ticket when a form appears broken
One first-fix retest reply included with the USD 50 pack
The USD 75 upsell for forms tied to paid traffic, CRM routing,
client handoff or multiple delivery states. Use this when the
cheap proof check finds risk or the funnel is already valuable.
For public lead forms already showing a disabled API, rejected
endpoint, 403, 404, 500, no backend delivery or client-side-only
success. Get reproduction evidence, likely root cause, first fix
plan and one retest.
The USD 59 report is meant for builders with a real launch risk:
browser sessions, CRM updates, file access, customer messages,
API calls, payments, scheduling, support replies or internal data.
Do not buy it when
The agent is still a toy demo
If your workflow only chats, has no tools, touches no customer data
and scored low on the self-check, use the free checklist instead.
The paid review should save a risky launch, not decorate a prototype.
USD 59 value floor
The paid report is not complete until it gives you these five things
This is the acceptance bar for the service. If the intake does not
support this level of answer, I ask for one focused clarification
before writing instead of padding the report.
Launch decisionShip, ship after fixes, or stop until a high-risk gap is closed.
EvidenceEvery high or medium issue is tied to a screenshot, config, demo behavior, code snippet or clearly labeled hypothesis.
First fixThe report names the first engineering move most likely to reduce launch risk.
Retest criteriaYou get pass/fail conditions for checking the first fix after implementation.
Reusable noteYou get a short customer or stakeholder answer explaining what was reviewed and what remains out of scope.
Before buyingRun the self-check first. If it does not reveal a real launch concern, keep the free checklist.
DeliveryPaid mini-audit: first pass within 24 hours after intake, final report within 48 hours for normal scope.
No fake findingsIf the workflow is low risk, the report says that and focuses on the few controls worth keeping.
Evidence standardClaims are tied to screenshots, configs, demo behavior, public docs or clearly labeled hypotheses.
Payback gateEvery paid report must produce a launch decision, a first fix, a retest path and a reusable security note.
First-fix retestAfter the report, send one redacted fix update within 7 days and get a short pass/fix-still-needed reply.
Open review trail
Directory and open-source submissions are tracked; review-pending
listings are not claimed as approvals.
Value promise
Not just findings: a launch decision plus first-fix closure
The paid review is complete only when it gives you a usable verdict,
the first engineering move, retest steps and one included follow-up
on that first fix. If the evidence is too thin for a verdict, I ask
for one focused clarification instead of padding a weak report.
You know whether to ship, fix first or stop.
You know which risky default to remove before the next demo.
You get tickets an engineer can paste into the backlog.
You get a short security note for a customer or stakeholder.
What you avoid
A shipped agent that lets untrusted text trigger tool calls, export
data, reuse a human browser session or send messages without review.
What you get
A short external report with a verdict, evidence, ranked fixes and
retest steps. It also includes concise remediation tickets so an
engineer can start on the first fixes immediately.
Why USD 59
This is a narrow pre-launch sanity check, not a full pentest. The
price is for catching the obvious expensive mistake before it ships.
How it pays back
One avoided unsafe default, one clearer customer security answer,
one engineer day saved or one first-fix retest can justify the
fixed price.
Standards mapping
Findings are mapped to practical areas from OWASP Agentic Top 10,
OWASP LLM Top 10 and NIST AI 600-1 themes such as pre-deployment
testing, governance, provenance and incident traceability.
What gets reviewed
Scope boundaries, tool calls, permissions, logs, screenshots,
file access, external servers, browser profiles and human approval
for actions that can change data or expose customer information.
How fulfillment works
Direct PayPal checkout is manual: after payment, send the PayPal
receipt, intake answers and preferred delivery email to
mauro_ceron1@hotmail.com. Do not send secrets.
What you can reuse
The report includes a short customer/security note describing what
was reviewed, what changed, which risks were mapped and what still
needs a full audit later.
For agencies
Use the same review as a handoff QA add-on before delivering client
agents, n8n workflows, browser automations or CRM integrations.
Quality bar
If the intake is too thin to support a verdict, I ask for one
focused clarification before writing instead of padding the report.
Preview
Run the free self-check first
Score one AI-agent workflow, then compare the result with the
public sample report before buying.
