AI readiness audit
Review existing repositories, tickets, docs, and operating rules before wider AI adoption.
HILLS Lab
We connect repositories, tickets, incidents, docs, and team decisions into a context layer that is current, verifiable, and permission-aware.
Focus
Context audits for existing engineering workflows
Repo, ticket, incident, and team memory
Permission-aware connectors for GitHub, Linear/Jira, Slack, Sentry, and docs
Evals that measure fewer wrong assumptions and safer code changes
Use cases
Review existing repositories, tickets, docs, and operating rules before wider AI adoption.
Context from GitHub, Jira/Linear, Slack, and docs with source, scope, freshness, and ownership.
Repo instructions, read/write boundaries, review rules, and traces that reduce wrong AI assumptions.
Clean up runbooks, deploy rules, and incident knowledge that agents should not guess.
Recommendations
Povio, ReneVerse, and Tilt are HILLS Lab work. The other recommendations show the wider engineering track record behind HILLS Lab.
Open, professional, transparent in communication, and reliable on every agreed scope.
A top-tier engineer who made next-level impact across core Web2/Web3 services and real-time ad targeting infrastructure.
Multiple people have called out the quality and speed of Hrvoje's work across several projects.
Wider engineering track record
Curious, proactive, and willing to take responsibility beyond his role early in his career.
Someone we could truly rely on, not afraid to take responsibility and push new initiatives forward.
An exceptionally capable engineer whose code was built to last in a highly challenging hypercar telemetry and OTA domain.
Thesis
The team advantage is not which tool wins this quarter. It is whether the system around the model knows what is true, current, allowed, relevant, and source-backed.
Engagement model
One conversation and a short review of tools, teams, repositories, and where context breaks today.
We map sources, permissions, stale context, ownership, and risk for one concrete workflow.
We harden one repository, team, or agent workflow so the result can be tested in practice.
You get recommendations, priorities, and a clear decision on implementation or retainer work.
Six checks before the answer
A context layer is not an archive. It has to decide what an agent is allowed to use before the model writes, changes, or recommends anything.
Which repo, ticket, incident, document, or decision supports the claim.
Whether the information is still current or a newer record has replaced it.
Whether this context is allowed for this team, tool, actor, and task.
What could break production, leak data, or lead the agent to a wrong conclusion.
What changed since the last run, deploy, incident, or recorded decision.
Whether a person can replay the path: sources, permissions, decision, and result.
PLAYGRND proof point
We build PLAYGRND as a public record for amateur football: SSR web, private Go API, Postgres/Redis, WhatsApp magic links, claim/correction loops, and derived season aggregates. It is the same pattern we bring to teams: fast public reads, controlled writes, clear sources, and human confirmation before AI changes an official record.
For local software teams
Local companies rarely need a generic AI demo. They need AI workflows that respect existing repos, clients, documentation, permissions, and production risk without adding another layer of chaos.
Notes
Short notes on failure modes, context rules, memory diffs, and evals for teams bringing AI into daily software work.