Comparison

Relay vs just running CI

Your CI already runs the tests. The question it cannot answer is whether those tests executed the lines your agent just changed — and that gap is exactly where AI-generated code slips through.

Facts checked against official docs on 2026-08-18

What plain CI is

A standard CI pipeline runs the test suite on every push and reports pass or fail. It is necessary, cheap, and universal — and it measures the suite, not the change. A green run means the tests you already had still pass; it carries no information about whether anything executed the new lines.

Pricing: Whatever your CI already costs.

Side by side

plain CIRelay
Runs your testsYesYes — and wraps the run in a signed receipt
Fails when existing tests breakYesYes
Knows which changed lines executedNo — a suite can pass while 0% of the diff ranYes — that intersection is the core measurement
Tamper-evident evidenceNo — logs can be re-run, edited, or cherry-pickedYes — Ed25519 signatures + a snapshot hash binding evidence to the exact tree
Tells the agent what to do nextNo — a red build is a message to a humanYes — a machine-readable action, flags pre-resolved, until PASS
Gate on the measurementCoverage thresholds, if configured, measure the project — not the diffThe verdict is specifically about the changed lines

The honest take

This is not an argument against CI — Relay runs inside it (`relayevals verdict` exits with the decision, so branch protection acts on it). The argument is about what a green build means. Before agents, "the suite passed" and "the change was exercised" were usually the same fact, because the person who wrote the code also wrote a test that called it. Agents broke that correlation: they produce code and sincere-sounding claims at a rate that makes "green" a weaker signal than it used to be. Measuring the diff directly restores the signal.

See what Relay measures on your own repository — one command, no setup, writes nothing: relayevals try. Docs · The full guide to verifying AI-generated code