How this site is checked
The website itself is a useful test of Zero Drift's claim that specifications, mechanical gates and human judgement belong together.
A passing build is necessary. It is not a good website.
This site is an Astro static build from content and data held in git. The build creates crawlable HTML, structured data, a sitemap, RSS and a search index. Executable checks look for broken internal links, invalid machine surfaces, staging URLs leaked into public copy, HTML defects, inaccessible controls and bad visual rhythm at desktop and mobile widths. A change can fail before it reaches a visitor.
That is the mechanical half. The other half is a human reading the page and asking whether it says something coherent. We found a refactor example on the first page before the service it proved had been explained. We found product art whose label carried meaning the image did not. We found a public-sector route hidden in the tree and buyer pages so thin they could be rearranged without becoming more helpful. None of those necessarily breaks a link check. They break trust and comprehension.
The answer was not to turn off the tests. It was to let criticism update the specification: each buyer route answers a specific question; a factual product screenshot is distinct from an illustration; an artwork explains its page without requiring a caption; the sitemap provides a route a stranger can follow. The checks then defend those decisions against regression.
There are still limits. Automated accessibility checks do not certify every assistive-technology journey. On 21 September 2026, a live quote submission was recorded, both messages were accepted by the mail relay and its acknowledgement arrived in the forms inbox; that is a checked delivery, not a guarantee for every future message. A paper PDF can have the right number of pages and still be a poor paper if each page contains a paragraph of oversized text. The accessibility statement and trust page say what is actually evidenced.
That is the point of a gate: it should make a false claim harder, not decorate a true-looking one. If you want the same discipline on your own product, start with the decision and the failure that would matter. See the review routes or tell us what needs to hold.