aiqbenchInformații despre AI & calcul cuantic

...

localeBeta.label localeBeta.notice localeBeta.readInEnglish

perspectiva aiqbenchProduse AI

This article details a practical evaluation framework where AI coding agents were used to stress-test Supabase documentation for Row Level Security, revealing critical gaps in agent-friendly guidance that could lead to data exposure. By treating documentation as executable code rather than static text, the authors demonstrate an iterative loop of testing and fixing that directly improves security posture and developer experience.

Sursă care acoperăSupabase

Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Are Supabase docs agent-friendly? We didn't know, so we checked

Supabase1 august 20265 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

We built an eval for our Row Level Security guide, found agents were granted risky default database access, and fixed the docs until the eval passed.

Our data proves it: people aren't reading our docs. They're pointing a coding agent at them instead. Someone opens Claude Code or Cursor, says "here, set this up", and the agent does the rest. A human can usually spot what isn't right: a missing flag, a step buried in a dashboard widget. An agent treads along, unaware. Are our Supabase docs agent-friendly? Can an agent finish these tasks? Until recently, the answer was "we don't know." That's why we kicked off a project with the goal of measuring our Supabase documentation. We run agents…

Extras afișat conform termenilor RSS ai publicației · 94 cuvinte · textul integral și figurile sunt pe site-ul publicației

Citește pe Supabase ↗Întreabă despre acest articol