Enji GuardCatch broken user journeys before your customers do
A green build does not mean the running app is safe. Guard exercises your live app on a schedule, within an approved scope, and flags the runtime gaps an AI-made change slips past your tests.
1 repo · setup in about 5 minutes · no card, no commitment
01
Passing tests are not a working app
Unit tests check pieces in isolation; they never exercise the app the way it runs in production. An AI change can keep every test green while leaving a route exposed, an access check bypassed, or a page reachable that never should be.
02
What Guard checks on the live app
Within an approved scope, Guard exercises your live app in a real browser on a schedule, pairing browser QA automation with user journey monitoring to find what static analysis cannot see:
- Routes and endpoints reachable without authentication
- Access control that breaks under real requests
- Forms, inputs, and redirects on real pages
- Security headers, CORS, and exposed responses
- Deeper sign-in and checkout journeys when you configure them
03
Failures tied back to repo context
Because the checks are linked to your GitHub repo, a runtime finding comes back with reproduction context and likely code areas, not just a red mark on a status page. You see what broke and where, in one place.
04
Alerts as issues, not noise
When a check fails, Guard opens a reviewable GitHub issue with what failed and the likely cause. The signal goes where your team already works, so it gets fixed instead of muted.
05
Where this sits next to uptime monitoring
Uptime monitoring tells you the server answered. It does not tell you that login, checkout, or onboarding still works. Synthetic monitoring for DevOps closes that gap by driving the real journeys on a schedule. When a journey gets noticeably slower, the browser run gives your team a concrete place to look.
06
Built for teams shipping with AI
When AI is writing changes faster than anyone can manually test them, synthetic monitoring is the safety net that keeps the running app honest between releases.
Quick questions
Is this synthetic monitoring or real-user monitoring?
Synthetic runtime verification, not real-user monitoring. Guard works from linked website targets and approved scopes, then reports runtime evidence back with repository context instead of waiting for production complaints.
Who defines the journeys it checks?
You define the approved target and scope. Deeper user journeys can be added as part of a configured runbook, but Guard does not guess private checkout or login flows on its own.
Where do the alerts go?
Findings land in Guard reports and, when GitHub output is enabled, as issues, issue comments, or pull requests tied to the repository. The goal is a fixable work item, not another noisy alert stream.
Does it catch slowdowns or only hard breakages?
Guard can surface frontend performance monitoring evidence when that improvement flow is enabled. It is not a full APM or real-user monitoring product; it keeps runtime signals connected to code review.
Watch the journeys that pay your bills.
Connect a repo and app, and get your first monitoring report in a few minutes. No card.