Free tool: runs in your browser
Vibe-coding review checklistbefore you merge or ship assistant-written code
TimeBinder adds a layer of protection against AI and human fraud and disputes. Check that a named person can explain, review and record the change an assistant helped write.
Nothing you tick is sent anywhere. This page does not scan your repository and it is not a security test.
Check a change before you merge it
Tick what is true of the change an assistant helped write. You get a shareable result and clear next steps. Your code is not sent to TimeBinder, because this page does not ask for the files.
Your choices stay on this page. Nothing you tick is sent anywhere or tied to your name.
Tick everything that is true of the change an assistant helped write
This looks at whether a person can own, review and record the change, not at the quality of the model. It does not scan your repository, and it is not a security test.
What to do now
What should I check before I ship code an AI assistant helped write? The short answer
A named person who can read the language should be able to explain the change, review the diff, run tests, and maintain it afterwards. Secrets, unexpected deletions and licence questions should be checked first.
This checklist scores those points. It does not scan the repository. A TimeBind of the files as they stood can show those exact files existed no later than a recorded time and still match. It does not show who wrote the code.
Why this came up in November 2026
On 2 November 2026, Bloomberg reported that Goldman Sachs had limited Anthropic's Claude Code and Microsoft's GitHub coding tools to engineers and quantitative "strats", after months in which traders and bankers had used them, and after an October review of productivity and risk. A Goldman spokesperson, Nick Carcaterra, told Bloomberg the firm makes tools available to find useful cases, then puts them "in the hands of those who are best suited to leverage them for the long term." The next day, Replit CEO Amjad Masad wrote that this is widespread in finance. On 12 November 2026 the X API reported more than four thousand likes and more than four hundred thousand impressions on that post.
This page does not speak for Goldman Sachs or for Replit, and it does not tell you to ban a tool. The checks are written so they work the next time a change is about to be merged, whether or not a policy restricts who may use an assistant.
Sources: Bloomberg Law, 2 November 2026, Fast Company, and Amjad Masad's 3 November post.
What this checklist does and does not do
The honest job of this page is to slow down a merge until a person can own the change, not to certify the code.
| Part | What it does | What it does not do |
|---|---|---|
| A named reviewer who can explain the change | Gives you a reason to pause until someone can maintain the code. | Review the diff for you, or prove the change is correct. |
| Secrets, production access and tests | Flags sessions that could reach live systems, or changes that would ship untested. | Scan the repository, rotate credentials, or run the tests. |
| A note of what the assistant changed | Helps you keep a short provenance record with the commit. | Settle a licence question, or show who holds the rights. |
| A TimeBind of the files as they stood | Records that those exact files existed no later than a recorded time and still match. | Show who wrote the code, or replace tests and code review. |
If you need a record of what you held
Before a session, and again when you merge:
- Keep a dated copy of the tree or the files as they stood, and a note of which parts an assistant changed.
- Make a TimeBind of those exact files. The fingerprint is made in your browser and the files stay on your device.
- Store the files and the Proof of Time Certificate with the review note.
A TimeBind shows the exact files existed no later than the recorded time and still match. It does not show who wrote them, who holds the rights, or whether the change is safe to ship.
First Pooled TimeBind free, no card, then from US$5. An ASAP TimeBind is US$15.
What a TimeBind shows, and what it does not. It shows that an exact file existed no later than a recorded time and that a copy shown later still matches its fingerprint. It does not show who made the file, who owns it, that its contents are true, or whether AI was used to make or edit it. This is general information, not legal advice.
When the change is ready for review, the free AI-assisted change description builder drafts a pull request description and commit note that say what the AI tool did and what you checked. It cannot see your code.
Vibe-coding review checklist: FAQ
Does this tool scan my repository?
No. It does not read your code, and it is not a security test. It scores whether a person can own, review and record a change an assistant helped write.
Why are banks tightening access to AI coding tools?
On 2 November 2026, Bloomberg reported that Goldman Sachs had limited Anthropic's Claude Code and Microsoft's GitHub coding tools to engineers and quantitative "strats", after an October review of productivity and risk. A Goldman spokesperson told Bloomberg the firm experiments, then puts tools in the hands of the people best placed to use them for the long term. Replit's CEO wrote that this kind of restriction is widespread in finance. This page does not speak for Goldman Sachs, and it does not tell you your employer's policy.
If I make a TimeBind of my repo, does that show I wrote the code?
No. A TimeBind of exact files records their SHA-256 fingerprints and a time. Later you can show those files existed no later than that time and still match. It does not show who typed the code, who holds the rights, or whether an assistant was used.
Should every team ban assistants for non-engineers?
This page does not say that. The useful test, whether or not a policy restricts a tool, is whether a named person can explain, review, test and maintain the change.
Is anything I tick sent to TimeBinder?
No. The checklist runs in your browser. Your ticks stay on the page.
Does a high result mean the code is unsafe?
No. It means a person cannot yet own the change, or that secrets, diffs or tests have not been checked. Do not merge or ship until those gaps are closed.
Related guides and tools
- Developer timestampingThe TimeBinder hub for software teams
- How to prove source code existed before a dateWhat a dated tree can and cannot show
- Timestamp code before open sourcingA record of the files as they stood before a public release
- Freelance code delivery before paymentDate the delivery set you actually handed over
- Bulk SHA-256 hash manifestFingerprint a folder of files in your browser
- SHA-256 file hash checkerFingerprint one file in your browser
- File comparison checkerSee whether two files are identical
- All free toolsPrivate, in-browser tools
Date the files as they stood, then review the change
Add a layer of protection against AI and human fraud and disputes: a dated, checkable record of the exact tree, kept with the review of what changed.
- Open the app and sign in with email or Google.
- Add your files. They stay on your computer.
- Seal them and download your Proof of Time certificates.
First Pooled TimeBind free, no card, then from US$5. See pricing.