CHECKING AVAILABILITYLoading current availability…Loading availability

Loading
vygoai
Readiness Check

Readiness Check

Is your product production-ready?

Answer a few questions. We’ll generate a read-only diagnostic prompt tailored to how you build — no secrets, no code changes.

Already have a completed analysis? Start a new one for any project — your earlier results stay available.

New analysis

Browse every past run grouped by project, with each project's current result.

View analysis history

Loading your readiness check…

Readiness Radar

What a readiness report looks like

Five assessment dimensions on one radial view — scored from a live self-assessment. Hover or tab to any dimension to see its top critical risk factor.

Hover, tap, or tab to a dimension node to reveal its top critical risk — click a node to jump to its deep dive.

Deep dive

Dimension deep dives

Click any dimension on the radar above to jump straight to its breakdown.

Evidence strip

What the assessment leaned on

The lowest-scoring check in each dimension. Expand the context below to read the exact reported answer each takeaway was drawn from.

  • SecurityRow-level security / tenant isolation55/100
  • ReliabilityFragility & single points of failure38/100
  • OperabilityError handling55/100
  • MaintainabilityLanguage stack70/100
  • Compliance posturePII & data sensitivity44/100

Dimension

Security

Good

74/100

Top critical risk: Row-level security / tenant isolation

You reported row-level security / tenant isolation as "session-scoped queries; no cross-tenant surface", which is adequate but not strongly evidenced.

Written analysis

On Security, the aggregate readiness score is 74/100 (good tier). This reflects the sub-metric checks from the build-time self-assessment rather than a generic maturity label.

Lowest-scoring checks include Row-level security / tenant isolation (55/100; “session-scoped queries; no cross-tenant surface”); Authentication (70/100; “session token flows; Turnstile-gated submissions”); Authorization & access control (78/100; “scoped ops endpoints with policy checks”).

  • Authentication70
  • Authorization & access control78
  • Row-level security / tenant isolation55

    Access and isolation gaps like this are exactly what attackers probe first.

    Explore the Scale Package →
  • Secrets management78
  • API surface hardening94

Dimension

Reliability

Good

78/100

Top critical risk: Fragility & single points of failure

You reported fragility & single points of failure as "single_region", which includes risk signals (single).

Written analysis

On Reliability, the aggregate readiness score is 78/100 (good tier). This reflects the sub-metric checks from the build-time self-assessment rather than a generic maturity label.

Lowest-scoring checks include Fragility & single points of failure (38/100; “single_region”); Error handling (86/100; “structured safe errors with graceful fallbacks”); Logging & observability (86/100; “structured JSON logs with request ids”).

  • Tests & deploy gates94
  • Error handling86
  • Background jobs & queues94
  • Fragility & single points of failure38

    Single points of failure like this turn small errors into customer-facing outages.

    Explore the Launch Package →
  • Logging & observability86

Dimension

Operability

Good

77/100

Top critical risk: Error handling

You reported error handling as "structured safe errors with graceful fallbacks", which is adequate but not strongly evidenced.

Written analysis

On Operability, the aggregate readiness score is 77/100 (good tier). This reflects the sub-metric checks from the build-time self-assessment rather than a generic maturity label.

Lowest-scoring checks include Error handling (55/100; “structured safe errors with graceful fallbacks”); Background jobs & queues (55/100; “email outbox worker with retry and idempotent processing”); Logging & observability (70/100; “structured JSON logs with request ids”).

Dimension

Maintainability

Good

74/100

Top critical risk: Language stack

You reported language stack as "TypeScript", including positive signals (typescript).

Written analysis

On Maintainability, the aggregate readiness score is 74/100 (good tier). This reflects the sub-metric checks from the build-time self-assessment rather than a generic maturity label.

Lowest-scoring checks include Language stack (70/100; “TypeScript”); Codebase size (70/100; “medium”); Tests & deploy gates (70/100; “unit and integration tests gate every deploy in CI”).

  • Codebase structure86
  • Language stack70
  • Codebase size70
  • Tests & deploy gates70
  • Frontend stack70
  • Backend stack70

Dimension

Compliance posture

Warning

55/100

Top critical risk: PII & data sensitivity

You reported pii & data sensitivity as "email, name; no payment, no health", which includes risk signals (payment, health).

Written analysis

On Compliance posture, the aggregate readiness score is 55/100 (warning tier). This reflects the sub-metric checks from the build-time self-assessment rather than a generic maturity label.

Lowest-scoring checks include PII & data sensitivity (44/100; “email, name; no payment, no health”); Authentication (55/100; “session token flows; Turnstile-gated submissions”); Authorization & access control (55/100; “scoped ops endpoints with policy checks”).