I built a small tool to flag risky code changes — looking for testers

I've been using coding agents more often lately, and one thing keeps bothering me: generating code is fast, but reviewing every change carefully still takes time.

So I built a small browser-based tool called PatchSift.

You give it the Before and After versions of a file, and it runs deterministic checks to flag changes that may deserve a closer look — things like removed auth checks, validation changes, SQL changes, hardcoded secrets, weaker TLS settings, and similar patterns.

It runs locally in the browser and doesn't require an account, repo access, or an AI reviewer.

It's still an early beta, so I'm mainly looking for people willing to test it and tell me where it gets things wrong:

• false positives
• risky changes it misses
• confusing findings
• whether the overall risk score is actually useful

If anyone wants to try it, I'll drop the link in the comments.

I'm especially interested in feedback from people using tools like Cursor, Claude Code, Copilot or Codex.