Technical audit for a SaaS inventory management platform

A US-based SaaS company Glimpse approached us with a request to perform a full-scale technical audit of their product, a platform designed for asset and warehouse management. Our team reviewed the entire codebase, infrastructure, and development workflow to identify technical bottlenecks and risks.

Data science & AI Logistics

Supply chain & logistics

2 weeks

Challenge

The client had a working platform but needed to understand whether it was technically ready for the next stage of growth. Two key challenges drove the audit request:

Preparation for scaling
The client planned to expand the platform’s capabilities and user base. They needed to understand whether the current architecture and code quality could support higher load and future growth.
Due diligence for an investment round
An independent technical review was required to demonstrate the system’s stability, scalability, and readiness to investors.

Our approach

We approached the audit with a structured and methodical review, focusing on the architecture, code quality, maintainability, and development workflow.

The entire codebase – frontend, backend, and GraphQL API – was structured as a monorepo. This setup made it easier to review how components interacted, trace logic across layers, and get a full picture of system architecture from a single source.

The project was handled by a compact team of specialists with strong experience in React.js, Ruby on Rails, and business intelligence. All results were documented in a detailed report, with prioritized recommendations, code examples, and action points for improvement.

The audit included six main areas:

Frontend review
Review of the React.js codebase, including rendering speed, code structure, and use of state management.
Backend review
Static code analysis and review of Ruby on Rails components, architecture, test coverage, and dependency management.
Infrastructure and deployment
Assessment of deployment processes, environment setup, and automation. Identified risks tied to manual installation and lack of documentation.
Database architecture
Analysis of database design, query performance, and data consistency. Suggestions provided for improving structure and scalability.
UI/UX design consistency
Evaluation of user interface alignment with business logic. Identified inconsistencies in how workflows were presented.
Development workflow and practices
Review of coding standards, onboarding readiness, and process consistency. Highlighted gaps in automation and documentation.

Project scope

The entire audit took two weeks, from the initial discussions to delivering a detailed report with technical findings and recommendations. Our team worked in stages, gradually moving from surface-level checks to deep technical analysis across the stack.

Here’s what it looked like:

Step 1. Requirements alignment	In the first two days, we aligned with the client on audit objectives, clarified expectations, and identified the areas of most concern. These included code quality, system scalability, and readiness for investment due diligence.
Step 2. Initial codebase assessment	We started by reviewing the top layer of the application across frontend and backend. This helped us spot early signs of inconsistency in coding standards, outdated patterns, and potential architectural issues. After getting the client’s approval, we moved deeper.
Step 3. In-depth backend review	The backend, built on Ruby on Rails, was reviewed for architecture quality, dependency risks, test coverage, and performance logic. We also analyzed how well the system handled data, security, and potential scalability demands.
Step 4. Frontend and UI evaluation	We reviewed the React.js frontend with a focus on structure, rendering speed, state management, and maintainability. The UI was also evaluated for consistency and alignment with business workflows.
Step 5. Infrastructure and database check	We examined the deployment setup, automation level, and environment configuration. Special attention was paid to database structure and query optimization, with recommendations for improving reliability and reducing future risks.
Step 6. Final documentation	All findings were compiled into a detailed PDF report, with annotated examples, recommended action points, and a prioritized list of issues to address.

Audit findings and recommendations

During the audit, we identified several areas where the system could be improved to support future scaling, simplify maintenance, and reduce technical risks. Below are the main findings and corresponding recommendations.

Backend
- Monolithic architecture
  The current structure was manageable under low load, but scaling required transitioning to microservices. We recommended planning for this shift if usage increases.
- Infrastructure setup
  There was no automated setup process for running the project from scratch. We advised implementing scripts for dependency installation and environment configuration. We also highlighted the complete absence of technical documentation as a major blocker for onboarding and long-term maintainability.
- Dependencies
  Several libraries used in the backend had known vulnerabilities. We provided a list of outdated packages and recommended immediate updates or replacements to reduce security risks.
- Code consistency and maintainability
  While some parts of the codebase followed best practices, others lacked consistency, were hard to read, or difficult to extend. We proposed specific improvements, including standardizing formatting, refactoring complex parts, and applying clean code principles.
Learn more
Frontend
- Code structure and readability
  Overall, the frontend was in acceptable shape, with common libraries and tools used across the codebase. However, we identified scattered patterns and areas where state management could be simplified. Recommendations included reorganizing component logic and ensuring consistent structure.
- Rendering and performance
  No critical performance problems were found, but we suggested minor optimizations to improve responsiveness, especially in data-heavy components.
Learn more
UI/UX design
- Alignment with business logic
  The current UI was built on assumptions that did not fully reflect how users interact with the system. We recommended a deeper review of workflows based on actual user behavior and business requirements.
- Design consistency
  While the design generally followed a logical structure, we noted opportunities to improve usability through clearer visual hierarchy and better alignment between interface elements and functionality.
Learn more
Development workflow
- Automation and onboarding
  The lack of automated scripts and environment setup was a recurring issue. We recommended creating onboarding guides and basic automation tools to reduce time spent by developers on manual setup.
- Testing
  The core business logic had adequate test coverage, but we advised adding tests for critical integration points and improving test documentation.
Learn more

Technologies used

The audit was performed through manual code review supported by an integrated development environment (IDE).

We analyzed the architecture, codebase, and dependencies without relying on automated static analysis tools. Instead, the team used real-world scenarios, project-specific logic, and their own expertise to inspect the system’s behavior, structure, and maintainability.

Team

React.js Engineer x1
Ruby on Rails Engineer x1
Business Intelligence Analyst x1
Project manager x1

Results

The technical audit was completed within two weeks, including initial discovery, in-depth analysis, and final documentation. The client received a comprehensive report with clear, prioritized recommendations and annotated examples covering all reviewed areas.

The customer noted that the audit exceeded their expectations both in the depth of analysis and the quality of feedback. Based on our findings and recommendations, they were able to:

Present a technically sound product to potential investors as part of their funding round
Address critical architecture, infrastructure, and codebase issues with clear, actionable steps
Align the system’s technical setup with planned business growth
Prepare the platform for increased load and feature expansion
Improve maintainability and developer onboarding by reducing manual setup and clarifying structure
Strengthen the product’s position as a scalable, investment-ready solution

Interested in our tech audit services? Learn how we can help you.

Learn more

Technical audit for a SaaS inventory management platform

Challenge

Preparation for scaling

Due diligence for an investment round

Our approach

Frontend review

Backend review

Infrastructure and deployment

Database architecture

UI/UX design consistency

Development workflow and practices

Project scope

Step 1. Requirements alignment

Step 2. Initial codebase assessment

Step 3. In-depth backend review

Step 4. Frontend and UI evaluation

Step 5. Infrastructure and database check

Step 6. Final documentation

Audit findings and recommendations

Backend

Monolithic architecture

Infrastructure setup

Dependencies

Code consistency and maintainability

Frontend

Code structure and readability

Rendering and performance

UI/UX design

Alignment with business logic

Design consistency

Development workflow

Automation and onboarding

Testing

Technologies used

Team

React.js Engineer x1

Ruby on Rails Engineer x1

Business Intelligence Analyst x1

Project manager x1

Results

Interested in our tech audit services? Learn how we can help you.