afterbuild/ops
§ S-06/break-the-fix-loop

Break AI fix loop — stop Cursor and Lovable breaking yesterday’s feature.

“The filter worked, but the table stopped loading. I asked it to fix the table, and the filter disappeared.” We end that loop. Architecture, critical-path tests, TypeScript strict, and an AI guardrails file — in 2 weeks.

$3,999fixed fee
2 weeks10 business days
40–60%regression drop post-engagement
Quick verdict

Break AI fix loop is a $3,999 fixed-fee, 2-week engagement that stops the AI regression cycle. We install real module boundaries, write integration tests on every critical path, add a regression test for every bug you have hit, pin TypeScript strict at seams, gate GitHub Actions CI on every PR, and ship a .cursorrules / .claude/rules.md file that tells future prompts which boundaries to respect. You keep vibe-coding new features — but Cursor, Lovable, and Bolt can no longer silently break working ones. Best for apps in the 1k–5k line range inside the prompt-test-break loop.

§ 01/regression-symptoms

Symptoms the AI regression cycle is producing.

Every client who hires Break-the-Fix-Loop has at least four of these six symptoms. Each row names the root cause and the specific intervention we install in 10 business days.

Stop AI regression cycle · Cursor regression fix · Lovable keeps breaking
SymptomRoot causeWhat we install
Asked Cursor to fix A, it broke B, C, and DNo module boundaries; every prompt touches unrelated files; no tests protect current behaviorArchitecture map + integration tests at the 3–5 seams where regressions keep landing
Lovable keeps breaking the same feature every promptMissing regression suite; the Lovable prompt has no memory of the last bugRegression test per historical bug + AI guardrails file pinning the boundaries
By file seven, the AI forgot decisions from file twoLLM context window loss on large codebases; no typed contracts at seamsTypeScript strict at seams + Zod schemas; AI cannot silently change the contract
Credit burn climbing with zero shipped featuresPrompt-retry tax from silent regressions; no CI gate to catch broken mergesGitHub Actions CI required on every PR; pre-commit hook blocks broken merges
Dreading the handoff to a human developerUntyped, untested codebase; new dev onboard time measured in weeksArchitecture doc + test-running guide + Loom walkthrough; day-one productivity
Unsure which Cursor prompt broke productionNo staging, no preview deploys, no rollback path; prompts land straight in mainStaging branch + Vercel preview deploys + tested rollback procedure
§ 02/10-day-schedule

Ten-day stop AI regression cycle schedule.

D1–D2 audits the fix loop. D3–D4 maps the boundaries the AI keeps breaking. D5–D8 lands the refactor behind tests. D9–D10 wires the CI gate, TS strict, the AI guardrails file, and the handoff Loom.

  1. D1–2days 1–2

    Regression audit — catalogue every Cursor fix loop

    Day 1–2: we walk your last month of commits and the bugs you filed, cataloging every ‘fixed A, broke B’ moment. This becomes the regression test backlog we burn down later in the engagement.

  2. D3–4days 3–4

    Architecture map — draw the missing boundaries

    Day 3–4: map the module boundaries the AI prompts cannot hold in their head. One A4 page identifying the 3–5 seams where regressions keep landing and where typed contracts will live.

  3. D5–8days 5–8

    Refactor behind tests at the seams

    Day 5–8: write integration tests asserting current behavior (green), refactor the seam behind a single function or module, tests stay green. Ship daily to a staging branch. Nothing touches production yet.

  4. D9–10days 9–10

    CI gate + TypeScript strict + AI guardrails

    Day 9–10: GitHub Actions required on every PR — type-check, lint, tests. TS strict on, implicit-any warnings cleared in touched files. .cursorrules / .claude/rules.md file pinning the boundaries for future prompts. 45-minute handoff Loom.

By file seven, the AI had forgotten the architectural decisions it made in file two. The only way out was to put the decisions in a file the AI had to read every time.
Founder — 12-person healthtech team· post Cursor regression fix
§ 03/ai-guardrails-file

The .cursorrules file we install on day 10.

This is the AI guardrails file we commit at the end of every Break-the-Fix-Loop engagement — one for Cursor, a mirror copy for .claude/rules.md. Every future prompt has to read it, and the CI gate refuses to merge changes that break it. It is the single biggest reason clients stop seeing the same Lovable keeps breaking symptom post-engagement. External refs: Cursor rules docs · Claude Code docs.

.cursorrules
markdown
01# .cursorrules — pinned 2026-04-17 (Afterbuild Labs Break-the-Fix-Loop handoff)02# This file is the contract the AI must respect. Do not edit without updating tests.03 04## Architecture boundaries05- Data access lives only in `src/lib/db/*`. Components never import from `@supabase/*`.06- HTTP/Stripe calls live only in `src/lib/integrations/*`. No `fetch` in components.07- Auth state reads live only in `src/lib/auth/session.ts`. No direct cookie access elsewhere.08- Server actions live only in `src/app/*/actions.ts`. No `"use server"` in components.09 10## Required patterns11- Every exported function has an explicit return type. No `any`, no implicit `any`.12- Every seam between a component and a module uses a Zod schema for input validation.13- Every mutation has an integration test in `tests/integration/` that runs in CI.14- Every bug fix adds a regression test in `tests/regression/` named `issue-<id>.test.ts`.15 16## Banned patterns (these break production — fail the PR)17- Using `createClient` from `@supabase/supabase-js` outside `src/lib/db/*`.18- Direct `stripe.*` calls in React components or route handlers.19- Disabling TypeScript strict, or adding `// @ts-ignore` without an `ISSUE-` comment.20- Committing `.env` or `.env.local`. Use `.env.example` for new keys.21- Skipping the signature verify step in `/api/webhooks/stripe`.22 23## Before you ship241. `npm run typecheck`  — must pass with zero errors.252. `npm run lint`       — must pass with zero warnings in touched files.263. `npm test`           — integration + regression suites must be green.274. Open the PR against `main`. CI blocks merge if any step above regresses.
Committed on day 10. Every Cursor, Lovable, or Claude Code prompt must respect it. CI blocks merges that violate any rule.
§ 04/ledger

What the Break-the-Fix-Loop engagement ships.

Eight deliverables — each a keyword-bearing noun phrase, each landed in your repo by day 10, each enforced by the CI gate.

§ 05/engagement-price

Two weeks. One price. End the Cursor regression fix cycle.

Best value for apps in the 1k–5k line range. Bigger codebases quoted as Finish My MVP ($7,499) or custom. Includes a mid-engagement Loom on day 5 and the handoff Loom on day 10.

refactor
price
$3,999
turnaround
2 weeks
scope
Architecture · integration tests · CI gate · TS strict · AI guardrails
guarantee
Partial refund on genuine scope miss — same promise as Emergency Triage
start break-the-fix-loop
§ 06/vs-alternatives

Break the fix loop vs hourly vs rewrite.

Four dimensions. The lime column is what you get when you pick a scoped architecture-plus-tests engagement over an open meter or a blank-slate rewrite.

Stop AI regression cycle · vs hourly contractor · vs full rewrite
DimensionHourly contractorFull rewriteBreak the Fix Loop
Pricing modelHourly contractor — open meterFull rewrite — $25k+, blank slate$3,999 fixed · 2 weeks · partial refund on miss
What changesVisible features rewritten, tests optionalEverything replaced, old app discardedUI identical; architecture + tests + CI underneath
AI usage after handoffAI still breaks things, no feedback loopTeam prompts a fresh codebase they do not ownKeep vibe-coding; CI gate catches every regression
DeliverablesCode diff only, no docs or rulesNew codebase, no migration playbookArchitecture doc + AI guardrails file + CI gate + Loom
§ 07/fit-check

Who should pick Break the Fix Loop (and who should not).

Pick Break-the-Fix-Loop if…

  • You have spent more than a week prompting the same bug across Cursor, Lovable, or Bolt.
  • Your app is in the 1k–5k line range and has real modules the AI keeps violating.
  • You want to keep vibe-coding new features, but stop the AI from breaking old ones.
  • You are about to hand the codebase to a new developer and you know it will be embarrassing.
  • Credit burn is climbing with zero shipped features — the loop is now the bottleneck.

Do not pick Break-the-Fix-Loop if…

  • The data model is unsalvageable — Finish My MVP or a full Platform Escape is the right next move.
  • The app is 10k+ lines of untested AI spaghetti — 2 weeks will not be enough; we will say so.
  • You want a single integration fixed, not a refactor — pick Integration Fix ($799) instead.
  • Production is down right now — Emergency Triage ($299) is the 48-hour SLA you want.
  • You are looking for a rewrite with a new stack — we keep your existing code, not replace it.
§ 08/refactor-engineers

Engineers who run the AI regression refactor.

Stopping the Cursor regression fix loop is a typed-refactor-plus-debugging engagement. Three specialists share the work.

§ 09/fix-loop-faq

Break AI fix loop — your questions, answered.

FAQ
Why does the AI keep regressing working features in Cursor and Lovable?
Because LLMs have no persistent model of which files connect to which. One Cursor user put it well: ‘by file seven, it has forgotten the architectural decisions from file two.’ The fix is not a better prompt — it is architecture plus tests plus typed contracts at the seams. Tests make regressions visible in seconds, architecture makes them less likely, and TS strict stops the AI from silently changing an API contract.
What if my Lovable or Bolt app is too far gone to refactor?
Sometimes it is. If the data model is wrong, or it is 5k+ lines of untested AI spaghetti with no clear seams, we will say so on the diagnostic and quote Finish My MVP ($7,499) — which assumes partial rewrite — or a Platform Escape for a full port. Break the AI fix loop works best on apps in the 1k–5k line range where real modules still exist.
Do I have to stop using Cursor or Lovable after the engagement?
No. The point is to make the AI safer to use, not to replace it. The test suite catches regressions before merge, the .cursorrules / .claude/rules.md file tells future prompts what to respect, and the CI gate blocks bad diffs. You can keep vibe-coding new features — the old ones stop regressing.
What if you cannot stop the AI regression cycle in 2 weeks?
We scope tightly on the diagnostic call. For apps under 5k lines with a clear domain, we hit 2 weeks 90% of the time. For bigger or messier codebases we quote 3–4 weeks upfront (that is Finish My MVP territory). A genuine miss on agreed scope triggers a partial refund — written into the contract, same as Emergency Triage.
Can you break the fix loop on Bolt, v0, Replit, Windsurf, or Claude Code?
Yes. The Cursor regression fix pattern works on Bolt, v0, Replit, Base44, Windsurf, Claude Code, and hand-written TS/Python. The shape is always the same: tests first at the seams, typed contracts second, CI gate third, AI guardrails file fourth.
Do you work weekends on the 2-week clock?
The 2-week clock runs 10 business days. We do not require weekend work but will if a launch window demands it — agreed upfront, no surcharge unless the scope changes. Day 10 is always a handoff Loom, not more refactor.
What is the measurable outcome after Break-the-Fix-Loop?
Most clients report a 40–60% drop in regression-related credit burn in the month after the engagement, simply because the AI stops re-fixing the same bug. That math makes the $3,999 pay back inside 1–2 months for any team already inside the loop. The data is from internal post-engagement surveys of 31 completed refactors.
Next step

End the AI fix loop. Keep the Cursor prompts.

2 weeks. $3,999. Architecture, critical-path tests, CI gate, AI guardrails file. After the engagement, your next Cursor or Lovable prompt stops breaking yesterday’s feature.

Book free diagnostic →