Mairit plugs into Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, and OpenClaw and routes pull requests, infrastructure changes, and migrations to a qualified senior engineer before they merge. Internal staff and principals first. Specialists when domain expertise is needed. Audit trail that holds up to SOC 2, your CTO, and your next postmortem.
Your engineering team rolled out AI coding agents this year. Productivity went up. So did the volume of code reaching production with no human eyes on it. Most PRs are fine. The ones that aren't break in production at 2am.
Pull requests written by Cursor. Migrations drafted by Claude Code. Infrastructure changes scaffolded by Copilot. Merged in minutes. Deployed in hours. Rolled back at 2am when the refund flow double-charges 10,000 customers.
The staff engineer catching the missing transaction boundary. The principal noticing the AI rewrote auth in a way that bypasses the rate limiter. The senior who realises the migration drops a column the analytics team still uses. They don't have the cycles to review every PR. The volume forces triage. Some critical changes get a quick LGTM. Some get no review at all.
Who reviewed and approved this change before it hit production? SOC 2 CC8.1 requires a documented change management process. Your incident response playbook starts with the same question. Right now, your evidence of senior review on AI-generated PRs is the GitHub approve button clicked by whoever was online. That's not going to hold up to your auditor. Or to your customer when their data leaks.
One command. The right reviewer. Reviewed code back in minutes. No more chasing reviewers in Slack, no more rubber-stamp approvals, no more 2am rollbacks.
An AI-generated PR. A migration. An infra change. A refactor. Something that would normally sit in the queue waiting for a reviewer who has 47 other PRs to look at.
Type /review. Mairit reads the work, identifies the domain, and surfaces the two or three people best placed to check it.
Your in-house staff engineer by default. A vetted external specialist from our network when domain expertise is needed. Structured rubric. Correctness, security, performance, blast radius. No essays.
Reviewed code returns inline. Cryptographically signed by a senior engineer. Audit-logged. SOC 2-ready. Ready to merge with a record that holds up to auditors and the next incident postmortem.
Same payments PR. Two paths to the on-call rotation.
Production code. Migrations. Infrastructure changes. The engineering work that needs senior review before it merges.
Your engineers ship PRs at 5x the previous rate with Claude Code, Cursor, and Copilot. Today senior review happens when the staff engineer happens to be online. With Mairit, every AI-generated PR routes to a senior for a structured review on correctness, security, blast radius, and rollback before merge. Concurrency bugs flagged. Auth bypasses caught. Migration risks surfaced. Merged with an audit trail your CTO can put in front of an auditor.
Schema changes. Backfills. Data migrations. The AI is great at writing them. Terrible at knowing which downstream service still reads that column, what the analytics team built on top of it, and which midnight job will fail spectacularly. Mairit puts a senior engineer with the dependency map between the AI draft and the production database.
Terraform changes. Kubernetes manifests. IAM policy updates. CI/CD pipeline tweaks. AI is fluent in the syntax. AI doesn't know your blast radius. Mairit routes infra changes to a senior who does. Reviewed against your environment topology, your security policies, and your incident history.
MCP-native. Directory-aware. Attested. Built for the work your team actually produces.
Mairit reads your engineering directory and knows which of your senior engineers own which services, which domains, and which on-call rotations. They're the default reviewers. When nobody internal fits, or they're not available, Mairit falls back to a curated network of senior engineers across payments, security, distributed systems, and infrastructure.
Reviewers don't write three paragraphs of free-text. They answer a rubric built for the specific motion. 18 questions for a production PR. 14 for a migration. 16 for an infra change. Faster for them. Consistent across the team. Defensible at SOC 2 audit.
When a senior engineer attests, it's cryptographically bound to their identity, their service ownership, and the timestamp. Every material action produces an immutable audit record. When your auditor or your incident response lead asks who reviewed what and when, you export the answer in one click. In a format that maps to SOC 2 CC8.1 change management and your incident review template.
Production PRs. Migrations. Infra changes. Security-touching code. Audited, regulated, customer-trusted. Mairit treats it that way from day one.
Documented evidence of senior-engineer review and approval before production change. Auditor-ready export per CC8.1.
Aligned with A.14 secure development controls. Evidence of qualified review captured per change.
PCI DSS Section 6.3.2 requires custom code review. Evidence of trained-reviewer assessment captured automatically.
For health-data systems, evidence of authorised personnel review captured per change.
Source code containing personal data handled with regional compliance. No model training. Reviewer access scoped.
One-click export of PR, review, attestation, and reviewer credentials in audit-preferred format.
Type I in audit. Type II target year 2.
AES-256 at rest. TLS 1.3 in transit.
Your source code is never used to train models.
Per-PR only. Secret-redaction default-on for code.
Pick one motion. Plug into Cursor, Claude Code, or your AI agent. See whether senior-grade review at machine speed actually changes how your engineering org ships.
CTOs and engineering leaders who'd rather have the change-management trail in place before the auditor asks for it.
Every postmortem starts with the same question. Who reviewed this before it shipped? Have an answer that isn't "the GitHub approve button."