SOFTWARE ACCEPTANCE, EVIDENCE-LED

Before you approve the work, know what was delivered.

A developer says your milestone is complete. UpperCheck compares confirmed promises against evidence from a locked GitHub delivery, so you can see what is supported—and what still needs proof.

Explore a sample comparison See how it works

UpperCheck implements public GitHub reviews and lab-tested, read-only private-repository access. The application is not yet deployed for customers. No client code needed for a first conversation.

DELIVERY SNAPSHOT LOCKED

MILESTONE REVIEW SYNTHETIC DEMO

Core Currency EngineDelivery A · $6,400 milestone

ACCEPTANCE RECOMMENDATION

HOLD ↗

More evidence is needed before acceptance is supported.

✓Decimal precisionSupported

✓Architecture & designSupported

!Functional demonstrationEvidence gap

✓ SUPPORT AND GAPS SHOWN SEPARATELY.

NOT ANOTHER CODE REVIEW TOOL.

01 Contract-first

02 Evidence-linked

03 Decision-focused

THE ACCEPTANCE GAP

“It’s done” isn’t the same as “it meets the agreement.”

Code review, QA and milestone tracking answer useful but different questions. Even when those processes are strong, a buyer may still need to know:

Did the delivered software meet the specific promises we agreed to?

UpperCheck starts with those promises. It ties findings back to available source, tests, and CI evidence—while clearly separating what is supported from what remains unverified.

01 / REQUIREMENTS

≡

Start with what was promised

Review and confirm the actual acceptance obligations, not a generic quality checklist.

02 / EVIDENCE

⌁

Look beyond green checkmarks

Inspect the cited implementation, tests, and available execution records at a fixed commit.

03 / DECISION

↗

Know what to do next

Get an evidence-backed ACCEPT, HOLD, or DO NOT ACCEPT recommendation and next actions.

INTERACTIVE PRODUCT EXAMPLE

Same requirements. Different proof.

Switch between two fictional deliveries, then inspect the seven example requirements and their linked sample evidence.

SYNTHETIC DEMONSTRATION
NOT A REAL CUSTOMER PROJECT

SAMPLE REVIEW

Core Currency Conversion Engine

Fictional $6,400 milestone · Seven fictional promises, four grouped areas

RECOMMENDATION

HOLD

The synthetic source and test definitions support six promises; this scenario does not include the execution record required by the seventh.

Scoped evidence
not a guarantee

Acceptance area	What the evidence shows	Assessment
Decimal precision	Supporting implementation and tests observed	Supported
Architecture	Required design evidence available	Supported
Reproducibility	Project setup and reproducibility evidence available	Supported
Direct functional proof	Required execution record not supplied in example A	Gap

A missing proof isn't the same as a failed delivery.UpperCheck can recommend HOLD when acceptance isn't yet justified by accessible evidence.

Inspect the reasoning, not just the verdict.

Read seven fictional contract promises, their evidence citations, and why Delivery A is on HOLD while B supports ACCEPT in this illustrative case.

Open full synthetic report

Both deliveries, file paths, and evidence snippets are fictional examples—not customer projects or actual test executions. A real review depends on your confirmed requirements and accessible evidence.

PRODUCT WALKTHROUGH

Follow a delivery through UpperCheck.

From confirmed requirements to a locked delivery and an evidence-linked report. This walkthrough will use a controlled test project with fictional requirements.

Video walkthrough coming soon

The recording is being prepared. You can explore the interactive sample comparison now.

Explore the sample comparison

Controlled test project · Fictional requirements · No customer materials

01Confirm the requirements
Review the promises for the selected milestone.
02Lock the delivery
Fix the review to a specific GitHub commit.
03Inspect the findings
Follow each assessment back to its cited evidence.

A CLEAR, CONTROLLED PROCESS

From agreement to decision, with a record of why.

UpperCheck turns software acceptance into a reviewable process rather than a conversation based on trust alone.

Request a walkthrough

Bring the agreement

Provide the selected milestone and its contractual language. UpperCheck proposes verifiable obligations for a person to confirm or correct.

Lock the delivered version

Fix the review to one GitHub commit, so the evidence corresponds to a particular delivery rather than a moving branch.

Examine the evidence

Inspect relevant GitHub source, test definitions, accessible CI records, and buyer-provided documents—without executing repository code. Public repositories are supported in the application; read-only private GitHub access is implemented and lab-tested. The customer application has not yet been deployed.

Review and decide

Read requirement-level findings, gaps, and buyer actions. Retain a tamper-evident report while the human buyer makes the final acceptance decision.

BUILT FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DECISIONS

Not just a score. Findings you can inspect.

Contract-first, not code-first

Start with the obligations that matter to acceptance, rather than a general-purpose scan.

Evidence with provenance

Link findings to specific source excerpts and a frozen GitHub commit.

Conservative when uncertain

Missing evidence is surfaced as a gap. It is not automatically treated as a defect—or quietly assumed to be proof.

Human authority preserved

The buyer confirms the requirements and remains responsible for acceptance. UpperCheck supports judgment; it doesn't replace it.

SCOPE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Know what the review can—and cannot—prove.

UpperCheck is an independently developed, early-stage product. It uses AI to assist with extraction and evidence assessment; the buyer confirms contractual meaning and makes the acceptance decision.

Inspect the synthetic evidence trail

Works alongside existing QA

Code review and testing assess implementation quality and behavior. UpperCheck organizes evidence around the promises in a selected milestone; it does not replace QA or an experienced technical reviewer.

Deliberately bounded

The application supports public GitHub reviews and has passed a controlled synthetic lab test of read-only private GitHub App access. It has not yet been deployed for customers. Source presence and test definitions are distinct from recorded execution; the app does not run delivered code or inspect every possible file.

Human responsibility stays clear

The buyer reviews the extracted obligations before locking scope. The current system does not provide independent human expert certification or automatic payment approval.

AI and data boundaries

The separate authenticated beta stores review inputs and retrieved evidence, and sends selected agreement and evidence text to an AI provider during live analysis. Its retention and customer-data terms must be established before a real-client pilot. The marketing site has no upload form.

Early-access operations

An accountable operator identity and verified business contact will be published before onboarding customer materials. There is no staffed human-verification service or independent expert sign-off in this release.

WHO IT'S FOR

For anyone accountable for signing off.

Founders & software buyers

Know which promises have support before accepting an outsourced milestone or releasing the next payment.

Fractional CTOs & advisors

Bring a structured evidence trail into your existing technical oversight process and client conversations.

Internal technology teams

Create a clearer acceptance record when evaluating an outside development vendor's delivery.

COMMON QUESTIONS

What to know before a review.

Clear limitations are part of a trustworthy verification process.

Is UpperCheck the same as automated code review?+

No. General code review focuses on code quality and change-level concerns. UpperCheck focuses on whether a specific software delivery has evidence supporting the confirmed contractual obligations for a selected milestone.

Does UpperCheck run the developer's code?+

No. It inspects available source, test definitions, and captured evidence. A test file is not the same as a verified execution result, and the report preserves that distinction.

Can it review private repositories?+

UpperCheck includes read-only GitHub App access to selected private repositories. This passed an end-to-end synthetic test using real GitHub authorization. However, UpperCheck has no production application deployment yet, so private customer repositories cannot currently be onboarded. Future private pilots require approved onboarding, repository permissions, verified hosting, security and retention terms before confidential data is processed. It is not open self-service access.

Is the outcome automatically approved by a human expert?+

No. The buyer must confirm the interpreted requirements and remains responsible for any acceptance decision. There is no staffed, independent expert sign-off service in the current beta.

Is the report a legal certification or guarantee?+

No. UpperCheck provides evidence-backed decision support based on the materials it can inspect. It does not guarantee production behavior, establish complete code coverage, or provide legal advice.

LET'S COMPARE NOTES

See whether it works for your next milestone.

We are preparing limited pilots for technical advisors and software buyers. The application supports public GitHub reviews and lab-tested private GitHub integration, but is not yet deployed for customer use. Private access can be considered for a controlled pilot after production and data-handling checks. A first conversation can review the synthetic report—without accessing your client materials.

✓ Prospective pilot scope: one past milestone, five to ten confirmed requirements, one GitHub repository (public, or approved private after production validation), and a comparison against your existing review process

EARLY ACCESS / INTRODUCTIONS

Start with a conversation.

Proposed walkthrough: 20 minutes covering the synthetic A/B comparison, evidence trail, current limits, and whether a narrowly scoped pilot makes sense. Pricing and availability are not finalized.

Demo booking is being set up. The contact inbox is not active yet. We will enable requests after verifying delivery and replies.

Explore the synthetic report No payment, customer credentials, private source code or contract documents are requested through this public site.