Get Audit
Not every API estate needs the same depth of analysis. The right scope depends on the size of your surface, the criticality of your endpoints, and what you already know about where problems might be forming.
Targeted review of specific endpoints or service areas
The Focused Audit is designed for situations where you have a specific area of concern. A service that has been behaving inconsistently. A set of endpoints that sit in a critical user flow. An integration that has had recent incidents. Rather than examining the full API surface, we concentrate analysis resources on the endpoints and dependencies most relevant to your immediate concern.
This scope works well for teams who have a hypothesis about where problems are forming but need structured analysis to confirm or refute it. It also works as a starting point for organizations new to API auditing who want to understand the process before committing to a broader engagement.
Teams with a specific service concern, post-incident review needs, or organizations exploring API auditing for the first time.
Comprehensive review across your entire API estate
The Full Surface Audit examines your entire API surface systematically. This is the appropriate scope when you want a complete picture of reliability and performance across all endpoints, not just the ones you already suspect. Problems often emerge from endpoints that are not on anyone's radar.
This engagement includes dependency chain tracing, schema drift detection, and a prioritized remediation roadmap. A review session with your engineering team is included, where we walk through the findings and discuss remediation approaches in the context of your specific architecture and constraints.
Organizations wanting a complete reliability picture, teams preparing for significant traffic growth, or companies with complex microservice architectures where endpoint interactions matter.
Ongoing quarterly reliability monitoring
API reliability is not a one-time problem. Systems evolve. Dependencies change. Traffic patterns shift. The Continuous Review engagement provides quarterly analysis cycles that track how your API surface changes over time and identify new reliability risks as they emerge rather than after they cause incidents.
Each quarterly cycle builds on the previous one. We track whether previously identified issues have been addressed, monitor for regression, and examine new endpoints or service areas that have been added since the last review. This creates a longitudinal view of your API health that a single audit cannot provide.
Organizations with active development cycles, companies that have completed an initial audit and want to maintain the reliability picture, or teams where API surface changes frequently.
We work with exported log data, trace exports, and read-only access to observability tooling where available. We do not require direct production system access, live database connections, or the ability to make requests to your endpoints. The specific data formats we can work with are discussed during the discovery call, and we can adapt to what your environment produces.
A Focused Audit typically runs two to three weeks from data collection through findings delivery. A Full Surface Audit generally takes three to five weeks depending on the size of the API surface and the availability of historical data. The Continuous Review engagement operates on a quarterly cycle with ongoing communication between cycles.
The discovery call and data collection phase require the most involvement from your team. After that, the analysis phase runs largely independently. For the Focused Audit, expect roughly two to four hours of engineering team time in total. The Full Surface Audit requires more context-gathering upfront but the analysis phase is similarly self-contained.
Limited logging reduces the depth of analysis possible but does not necessarily prevent an audit from being useful. We discuss what data is available during the discovery phase and scope the engagement accordingly. In some cases, we may identify logging gaps as a finding in themselves, since the absence of observable data is itself a reliability risk.
Our methodology applies to REST APIs, GraphQL APIs, and gRPC services. The specific analysis techniques vary by API type, but the core concerns around latency, error patterns, dependency behavior, and schema consistency are relevant across all of them. We discuss the specifics of your API types during the discovery phase.
A brief conversation about your API landscape and current concerns is usually enough to identify the right starting point.
Start a Conversation