What does a Cursor code audit check?
Large accepted diffs
Multi-file agent changes that were approved in bulk, re-read line by line.
Pattern consistency
Competing conventions introduced across sessions with different context in the window.
Rules coverage
Whether project rules encode the constraints that actually matter, and where generated code ignores them.
Context gaps
Code written against a partial view of the repo, duplicating logic that already existed elsewhere.
Access control
Server-side authorization on every route, including ones added late in a session.
Secrets
Keys in env files, client bundles, and anything committed during rapid iteration.
Dependencies
Packages added by the agent, their CVEs, and the ones now unused.
Database access
Query patterns, missing indexes, migrations, and constraints skipped for speed.
Input validation
Boundary validation on API routes and server actions.
Error handling
Generated try/catch blocks that log and continue as if nothing failed.
Type safety
Suppressed errors, `any` escapes, and types that no longer match the data.
Dead code
Superseded implementations left in the tree after a later session solved it differently.
Test reality
Whether generated tests assert behaviour or simply mirror the implementation.
Performance
Request-path work, N+1 access, and payloads that only look fine locally.
Production readiness
Deployment, monitoring, backups, and rollback for the system as built.
Other audits
Each audit answers a different question. Most engagements combine two or three.
Build with
confidence.
AI builds the product. Vibecop makes sure it won’t break in production, fail under scale, or expose your users to risk. One audit. Fewer expensive surprises.
