[launch]
Autometric is a best-in-class enterprise AI reviewer for bugs and security first, with linked task context, compliance, and governed rollout built into the same review flow.
[ai code review]
Catch bugs and security issues before merge.
Multi-agent review surfaces logic bugs, auth flaws, insecure patterns, performance regressions, and style drift without drowning engineers in noise.
See AI Code Review[task context]
Review the change against the work item behind it.
Linked bug and enhancement context can trigger regression and acceptance checks inside the same review flow.
See Task Context[compliance engine]
Turn named frameworks on where they matter.
SOC 2, PCI DSS, HIPAA, ISO 27001, GDPR, FedRAMP, and NIST 800-53 enforcement live inside the same review flow.
See Compliance Engine[enterprise rollout]
Run one governed reviewer across the real estate.
GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Gerrit, and Perforce can share one rollout model with RBAC, audit history, and flexible deployment.
See Integrations[problem]
AI is writing more of your code. Your bug, security, and audit bar did not get lower.
Developers are shipping pull requests at AI speed. Teams still need real bugs, auth flaws, insecure patterns, and performance regressions caught before merge, and auditors still want the same evidence chain: who reviewed what, against which control, with what outcome. Most AI code review tools optimize for developer convenience first. Autometric is built for teams that need a serious reviewer and proof the review happened correctly.
What changes with Autometric
- Best-in-class AI review for bugs, security, performance, style, and compliance.
- Linked task context for bug and acceptance-aware review.
- Named framework enforcement in every in-scope repository.
- One policy and evidence model across modern Git platforms and legacy enterprise SCMs.
[task context]
Review the change against the bug or feature it claims to implement.
Task Context pulls linked ticket details into the review so Autometric can check regression coverage for bugs, walk acceptance criteria for features and tasks, and catch wrong-intent changes earlier.
Bug-aware checks
Regression expectations can be enforced before merge.
Acceptance-aware checks
Feature and task tickets can be checked against what shipped.
[task-linked review]
Linked ticket context changes what the reviewer checks.
This is not a generic side panel. The linked ticket changes review behavior, severity, and evidence for the exact pull request under review.
Duplicate charge on payment retry
Expected outcome: second submit reuses the first successful charge and returns the original receipt.
What the ticket demands
- Reuse the original idempotency key when the checkout button is pressed twice.
- Return the existing receipt instead of creating a second charge.
- Add regression coverage for the repeated-submit path before merge.
Autometric review
The linked bug raises regression expectations and checks whether the diff matches the ticket.
Regression coverage missing
Retry-path logic changed, but the pull request does not add a test for repeated submit behavior.
Scope drift detected
The diff also edits billing-email copy that is not described in PAY-1842 or the linked bug notes.
Ticket evidence attached
Repro steps and expected behavior stay attached to the same review record and export path.
Bug-aware review
Linked defects can demand regression coverage before merge.
Intent check
Out-of-scope edits surface as scope drift instead of sliding through unnoticed.
Same evidence path
Ticket context stays attached to the review record and export trail.
[compliance]
Seven frameworks. One review.
Turn on the frameworks in scope for a repository and Autometric rewrites the review accordingly. Every finding carries its control reference, every completed review can export evidence, and fail-closed is the default for repositories you explicitly mark as in scope. The same review engine still catches ordinary bugs and security issues while the framework layer adds context.
[integrations]
Works where your code actually lives.
The enterprise does not get to pick one SCM. Security, platform, and acquired teams all bring different review surfaces. Autometric runs the same review flow across all of them while Task Context keeps linked bug and enhancement details attached upstream.
GL
GitLab
Inline merge request comments and policy enforcement
BBC
Bitbucket Cloud
Workspace token support and comment posting
BBDC
Bitbucket Data Center
Server-side webhook validation and anchored PR comments
ADO
Azure DevOps
Azure-native pull request workflow support
GER
Gerrit
Single-call review submission model
P4
Perforce
Helix Swarm review compatibility
[accuracy]
Review quality stays at the center.
Autometric is not a compliance wrapper around a shallow reviewer. It orchestrates specialists for security, bugs, performance, style, Task Context, and compliance, then routes their output through a Judge / Verifier and an independent QA pass.
Security reviewer
Secrets, auth boundaries, unsafe data handling.
Bugs reviewer
Logic flaws, unsafe edge cases, broken assumptions.
Performance reviewer
Hot-path regressions and wasteful operations.
Style reviewer
Consistency, readability, and maintainability.
Task Context reviewer
Linked bug and acceptance context when tickets exist.
Compliance reviewer
Framework-aware controls for in-scope repositories.
Verifier agent
Consolidates findings into one ranked review stream.
QA agent
Samples completed reviews to score accuracy without raising live review noise.
[governance]
RBAC, audit logs, and deployment built for security teams.
Eight productized roles, tenant isolation, and deployment modes that scale from SaaS convenience to air-gapped control. Your code never has to leave the boundary you set.
[rbac]
Eight roles. Fifty-plus permissions.
[deployment]
Deploy where your code can stay.
SaaS
Google Cloud, fast rollout, region-selectable.
Single-tenant VPC
Dedicated compute with tighter perimeter control.
Air-gapped
Self-hosted models and no public network dependency.
[trust]
Your code is yours.
Autometric does not train models on customer source code. The Security page covers Autometric's own deployment, data handling, model governance, and legal posture. Linked task context stays inside the same deployment boundary and handling model as the review itself.
[trust center]
Security documents without the scavenger hunt.
[pricing]
Transparent pricing. Five tiers. No stacked surprises.
Free
$0
Single-developer evaluation with one repository and a lightweight token budget.
Pro
Contact sales
Developer-led rollout for smaller teams that need a transparent path to evidence generation.
Team
Contact sales
The core plan for regulated engineering teams that want strong review quality and named framework enforcement.
Enterprise Lite
Custom
Single-tenant and region-sensitive deployments with deeper identity and key controls.
Enterprise
Custom
On-prem and air-gapped deployment with custom frameworks, BYOK, and dedicated support.
[final cta]
Ship at AI speed. Prove it at audit speed.
Book a 30-minute session with a solutions engineer and see review quality, Task Context, and compliance in one sample flow.