How to trust the answers
An AI that talks confidently about your Salesforce org is easy to build. One you can trust is not. Here is exactly how sf-intelligence earns it — the test suite, the CI gate every change must pass, the per-answer trust labels, and the boundaries it refuses to cross.
automated testing
~3,100 tests across the stack
Every layer of the product has its own test suite — from the metadata extractors and the dependency-graph engine to the 148 MCP tools and the CLI. These run on every change.
Plus 7 integration suites that drive the real MCP server end-to-end — including post-refresh golden tests, a fixed reference-question set, and deep smoke tests.
the ship gate
Nothing ships unless all of this is green
Every change runs the full gate in CI. A single red check blocks the release.
Strict TypeScript across every package.
ESLint, including import-order rules.
Every package suite must pass.
The real MCP server, end-to-end.
The server boots and answers over stdio.
A large question set is routed and checked, not just plumbing.
Answers are checked for the right verdict, not just a response.
Import / refresh / resolve budgets enforced (below).
Static application security scanning.
Validates the exact shipping set before publish.
Fails the build if any real org identifier is found in the shipping set.
per-answer trust
Every answer is labelled
Testing keeps the code correct. These labels keep each answer honest — you always know where it came from, how it was derived, and how complete the evidence was.
confidence
provenance
completeness
tested at scale
Budgets, gated in CI
10,000 nodes in under 90 seconds.
1,000 object + field files in under 10 minutes.
p95 under 2 seconds on the CI vault.
adversarial QA
Tested on real orgs
Beyond synthetic fixtures, the product is exercised against real production Salesforce orgs with a deliberately adversarial, failure-finding QA pass — not happy-path validation. Bugs found on real metadata are fixed and turned into regression tests so they stay fixed.
No customer org data is published or shipped — see the leak scan above.
the honest part
What testing can't promise
Trust also means stating the limits plainly.
Anything labelled heuristic (the Apex scanner, name-pattern detection) may have false positives. Spot-check before acting.
Dynamic SOQL and reflective Apex are invisible — "no references found" means "no static evidence", not "definitely unused".
The vault is a snapshot. health_check tells you when it's stale.
No write path means no accidental changes — and no claim to fix anything for you.
Trust, but verify.
Every claim above is in the open-source repo and runs in CI. Point it at your own org and check the answers against reality.