Hi Product Hunt, I'm Nikita, and this is Tiden, the product we've been building for the past year. It's for engineering teams shipping agent-written code every day who want to let agents do the coding while keeping control of what ships.

Qase is a software testing platform used by tens of thousands of builders, and 9 years of building it for them taught us a lot about how quality work gets done. Last year that changed on our own team: agents started producing most of the code, and the rest of our process didn't speed up with it. Review, testing, release, keeping requirements current: all of it became bottlenecks.

Other engineering teams tell the same story. A gaming publisher I talked to, with about 1k+ developers, saw pull request volume go up 4 to 5 times while the number of features they shipped stayed flat. A payments company described 10 times the coding output and 10% more delivery.

The problem underneath it

An agent session produces the code, the tests that pass on that code, and the docs describing what it built. The next session reads those docs as fact. Every artifact agrees with every other one, because they all came from the same place. A QA automation lead at a tax and accounting platform put it best: "If you have an agent that decides what to build, and then another agent is grading what's being built against what was actually built, you're essentially encoding the wrong thing. Your tests will pass, they'll be green, but it wasn’t what you wanted."

The two usual fixes, another rules file in the repo and better AI code review, both sit inside that same loop. The judge has to sit outside it.

What Tiden does

Tiden is that judge. It's intent verification for coding agents: it sits beside your agents, whichever ones you use, and verifies that what they built is what you actually asked for. It keeps that intent as specs, versioned like code, and checks every change against them rather than against the session that produced it.

Every agent session becomes a closed loop:

A session hook captures what you asked for before the first edit
The change comes back as a requirement for you to review; requirements branch and merge like code
Tiden picks the tests the change touches, runs them in your environment, and the agent fixes what fails before anything merges
The gate is tied to the spec. Red tells the agent what to fix. Green is a pass you can defend, with the evidence attached
In production, an error traces back to the release, the change and the prompt behind it, and the fix comes with the test that was missing

Tiden works beside Claude Code, Cursor, Codex and Copilot, and belongs to none of them. Specs live as one versioned record every agent reads from, instead of a growing pile of markdown. You set the thresholds and the gates, and a person approves anything the loop can't settle.

One limit, stated plainly: Tiden checks the work against what you asked for. Whether you asked for the right thing is still a human judgment.

Get started

Tiden is live at https://tiden.ai. The CLI installs in one command, the docs are at https://docs.tiden.ai, and Starter and Team both come with a 14-day free trial. If you'd rather talk to us first, there's a short form on the site: https://tiden.ai/contact.

What I'd like from you

Honest feedback over upvotes. Where does your team feel this gap most: review, regression, release, or production? What would make you trust an external check?