I’ve found that the real failure point is whether the team can explain what decision would actually change if the system worked. If no concrete action shifts, adding AI just adds complexity without leverage.
At first glance I can pretty much understand what it does.
My thoughts are that maybe you could show something like: “What mistake does this stop me from making?”
For example - try reframing the top section around a real scenario (accidental secrets, bad config, rushed deploys) before explaining how CommitGuard works. I think that would make it click faster for someone skimming.
Building gives you code and screens, which show momentum, while investigating demand mostly gives you negative information, which feels like you're not going anywhere - even when it’s the highest leverage work.
For me, I reframe validation as finding out what people already do ... not trying to convince anyone or predict any kind of behavior. It’s much more simple and less satisfying than building, but it helps me make decisions faster.