We tidy AI-assisted code that has drifted, and use AI tools to modernise old code faster. Engineers review every change, and tests cover it, so your team keeps shipping features while the codebase gets healthier.
Whether the code was written last quarter with AI help or ten years ago by hand, the method is the same: measure, protect, change in small steps.
Months of Copilot and Cursor commits leave three ways to do the same thing, copied helpers and patterns nobody chose.
Old PHP, Laravel, Yii, AngularJS and jQuery code upgraded faster, because AI drafts the repetitive changes and engineers check them.
Each sign has a number behind it. We measure it at the start, so you can see it move the right way.
Fixes break something else, so every release carries risk.
We measureChange failure rate
Pull requests wait because nobody is sure what a change touches.
We measurePull request review time
One fix has to be made again in every copy of the code.
We measureDuplication
Checkout, billing and sign-up can break without a test failing.
We measureCoverage on key flows
Every change waits on a slow pipeline, so the team ships less often.
We measurePipeline time
The code only makes sense to the people who wrote it.
We measureTime to first merged change
Nothing merges on trust. Each pull request passes the same four gates before it reaches your main branch.
Map the code and measure the signals above, so progress has a starting line.
Tests that pin down how the code behaves today, so a change that alters it fails at once.
AI drafts, engineers review. Feature flags guard risky parts, and big parts are replaced piece by piece (the strangler pattern).
Tests, static analysis, a security scan and a performance check before anything merges.
Lint rules, architecture notes, AI coding rules and CI gates, so the code stays clean after we step back.
Dashed items are typical, and confirmed for your codebase in the assessment.
Start with a baseline. An assessment tells you where refactoring pays, and what it would cost, before any code changes.
Request a Refactoring AssessmentAI takes the repetitive work. Every decision that matters stays with a person who answers for it.
AI does
Engineers decide
“AI makes us faster. It doesn’t make the decisions.”
The upgrades we are asked for most. Each one runs as small, tested steps, never as one big switch.
The paths are examples, confirmed for your stack in the assessment.
Not every codebase needs us. Answer three questions for a first view, or read the whole table.
Answer the three questions to see which column fits.
| Your situation | RefactorImprove it in place, one small change at a time. | Rewrite part of itReplace the part that holds everything back. | Leave it aloneSometimes the best change is none, for now.We’ll tell you |
|---|---|---|---|
| The product earns money today | Fits: Keep it earning while it improves | No bearing: Only the part that blocks growth | Fits: If it is stable and rarely changed |
| The core data model is wrong | Does not fit: Refactoring can’t fix that | Fits: Replace that part first | Does not fit: It will keep costing you |
| Tests exist | Fits: Safe to start now | Fits: They define what the new part must do | No bearing: No bearing |
| The team knows the domain | Fits: Their knowledge guides each change | Fits: Needed to rebuild it right | No bearing: No bearing |
| A hard deadline is near | Does not fit: Start after the deadline | Does not fit: Start after the deadline | Fits: Ship first, then revisit |
The same work, seen from two chairs. Pick yours.
What you notice from the product side, without reading a line of code.
Releases fail less often, so customers see fewer bugs.
Less time lost untangling old code in every sprint.
Investors and buyers see tests, documentation and current versions.
Knowledge lives in the code and its notes, not in one person’s head.
What your engineering team gets to keep and build on.
The files that change most and break most, in order.
Merges wait until the tests and checks pass.
Why each structural choice was made, written down.
Frameworks and libraries back on supported versions.
The baseline signals, measured again at the end.
Each step builds on the one before, so the plan you pay for is the plan we work from.
Hotspots, metrics and a plan, so you know where refactoring pays before it starts.
We work alongside your developers, in your repo, on the plan from the assessment.
An engineer who joins your team and keeps the codebase healthy as features ship.
What CTOs and tech leads ask us first. Anything else, ask in your request.
+91 97123 07570Mon–Fri, 9:30 AM – 7:00 PM ISTNot in a way you will feel. Changes are small and go through your normal review, so feature work carries on. Most teams ship faster within a few sprints, because each change touches less code.
Only with your agreement. We use business or zero-retention settings, so your code is not stored or used for training, and we sign an NDA first. If your rules say no AI tools at all, we work without them.
Before we change anything, we write tests that pin down how the code behaves today. Every pull request then runs those tests, static analysis and a security scan, and an engineer reviews it. Risky parts go out behind feature flags.
Yes, that is how we prefer to work. We open pull requests in your repository, follow your review rules and join your stand-ups, so your team sees every change.
Mainly PHP, Laravel, Yii, JavaScript and TypeScript, AngularJS, Angular, React and Vue, plus Flutter and React Native mobile apps.
AI Prototype Rescue takes an app built with AI tools to its first launch. Codebase Modernization is for a live product that a team keeps shipping, and we work alongside that team.
The assessment measures the signals first: rollbacks, review time, duplication, test coverage and pipeline time. We measure them again as we go and at the end, and you get a before-and-after report.
The stack, its size and what slows your team down is enough to start. We’ll tell you honestly if it’s better left alone.
Prefer email? info@amcodr.com
