This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
PromiseProof
AI can fix code. It shouldn't certify itself.
PromiseProof shows a safer way to use coding agents. GPT-5.6 investigates a broken product promise, Codex proposes a constrained repair and a human approves the exact patch. Neither model can award PASS, the unchanged deterministic verifier does. Try it in your browser, tamper with the evidence, reproduce a sealed report or run the same gate in CI.
I built PromiseProof during OpenAI Build Week because I kept returning to one uncomfortable question: when an AI agent repairs code, who decides that the repair is actually correct?
In PromiseProof, GPT-5.6 investigates a sanitized evidence dossier and selects one bounded diagnostic replay. Codex proposes a constrained source patch in isolation. I review and approve the exact diff. Then the same unchanged deterministic test that caught the broken promise decides PASS or FAIL and neither model can grade its own work.
The current release proves the workflow on an 'off means off' personalization contract, with a browser verifier, CLI, and GitHub Action.
I would especially appreciate feedback from people building coding agents or working in QA, privacy, reliability and CI.
About PromiseProof on Product Hunt
“AI can fix code. It shouldn't certify itself.”
PromiseProof was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 3 upvotes and 1 comments, placing #146 on the daily leaderboard. PromiseProof shows a safer way to use coding agents. GPT-5.6 investigates a broken product promise, Codex proposes a constrained repair and a human approves the exact patch. Neither model can award PASS, the unchanged deterministic verifier does. Try it in your browser, tamper with the evidence, reproduce a sealed report or run the same gate in CI.
On the analytics side, PromiseProof competes within Open Source, Artificial Intelligence, Development and OpenAI Day — topics that collectively have 549k followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how PromiseProof performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted PromiseProof?
PromiseProof was hunted by Alexandre Paiva. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
For a complete overview of PromiseProof including community comment highlights and product details, visit the product overview.
Alexandre Paiva
Hey Product Hunt 👋
I built PromiseProof during OpenAI Build Week because I kept returning to one uncomfortable question: when an AI agent repairs code, who decides that the repair is actually correct?
In PromiseProof, GPT-5.6 investigates a sanitized evidence dossier and selects one bounded diagnostic replay. Codex proposes a constrained source patch in isolation. I review and approve the exact diff. Then the same unchanged deterministic test that caught the broken promise decides PASS or FAIL and neither model can grade its own work.
The current release proves the workflow on an 'off means off' personalization contract, with a browser verifier, CLI, and GitHub Action.
I would especially appreciate feedback from people building coding agents or working in QA, privacy, reliability and CI.