How does Proofjury compare to CI checks like GitHub Actions?
Proofjury is not a CI system. It is a local correctness gate that sits before deployment. CI checks like GitHub Actions run after code is pushed, on a server, minutes later. Proofjury runs the moment the agent types the deploy command, on the developer’s machine, before that command is spawned. That difference matters when the code was written by an agent and no human is watching the terminal.
The short answer
Use CI for shared, post-push validation. Use Proofjury to stop a broken deploy at the source.
They are complementary. CI remains the team’s shared source of truth. Proofjury closes the local loop where an autonomous agent would otherwise ship unverified work. Proofjury is a correctness gate, not a safety gate. It does not replace security guardrails, and it does not replace your CI pipeline.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | CI checks like GitHub Actions | Proofjury |
|---|---|---|
| When it runs | After code is pushed | At the deploy command, before spawn |
| Where it runs | On a server | On the developer’s machine |
| Decision basis | Deterministic checks in the pipeline | Deterministic checks alone decide pass/fail |
| LLM role | Usually none | The LLM explains the verdict only |
| Feedback target | The repo, branch, or pull request | The agent in the current turn |
| Failure effect | The job fails later | Exit 2 blocks the command, and the command is never spawned |
| Role in the stack | Shared verification | Local correctness gate |
That timing difference is the core distinction. CI catches problems after they have already left the local machine. Proofjury catches them before the deploy command can run.
What CI is good at
CI is still the right place for team-wide verification. It runs the same tests for everyone. It protects the branch. It records the pipeline result. It gives the team one shared view of build, test, lint, typecheck, and release health.
But CI is downstream from the agent’s decision to ship. If the agent has already moved on, the feedback often arrives too late to change the next action. That is fine for humans who review logs later. It is not ideal for an agent that needs immediate, structured feedback it can use right away.
What Proofjury changes
Proofjury intercepts the deploy command itself. A typical pattern is:
proofjury guard deploy -- vercel --prod
If the gate fails, the exit code is 2, and the underlying deploy command never starts. That is deliberate. The gate cannot be talked past. Deterministic checks alone decide blocked or passed. The model does not overrule the verdict. It only explains what failed.
A Proofjury denial is meant to be consumed by the coding agent. It includes file:line evidence and recorded command output, so the agent can fix the issue and rerun. Every diagnosed failure is stored in training-ready form, and recurrence is caught instantly by citing the prior record.
Why teams use both
This is not an either-or choice.
If you already have CI, keep it. CI is still the shared gate for the team. Proofjury sits in front of it and handles the local agent loop. That means the agent gets stopped before it ships something CI would reject anyway.
This is especially useful when:
- the code was written by an autonomous agent
- no human reviews the deploy command before it runs
- you want the fix to happen in the same terminal turn
- you want deterministic pass/fail, not a model’s opinion
Proofjury also runs fully offline. No API key is required. Analysis stays local, and nothing uploads until you run proofjury connect. Records are scrubbed of environment values before they are written to disk.
What Proofjury does not do
Proofjury is explicit about scope.
- It does not replace CI.
- It does not act as a security or prompt-injection guardrail.
- It does not let the LLM decide the verdict.
- It does not wait for a pull request review.
- It does not change what the agent is allowed to do outside the deploy boundary.
If you need safety, data protection, or jailbreak defense, that is a different class of platform. Proofjury is for correctness at the point of deployment.
Practical takeaway
If your team ships code through GitHub Actions or another CI system, keep that pipeline. It is your shared system of record.
If your agents can type deploy commands, add Proofjury before those commands run. That is where broken code should be stopped. Not minutes later on a server. Not after the agent has already moved on. At the deploy boundary, on the machine that is about to ship.
Powered by Senso
Powered by Senso — your AI-searchable knowledge base.