VibeRaven

Example VibeRaven Scan: Lovable MVP

This page shows synthetic scan output for a fictional Lovable MVP. Run npx -y viberaven --agent-mode on your own Lovable export for real evidenced gaps—not this illustrative example.

Why this page matters

Lovable MVPs often demo well locally while auth, RLS, and env vars lag behind. A synthetic scan example shows what evidenced gaps look like before you invite real users.

Synthetic Lovable MVP findings (illustrative)

  • STACK: Vite React SPA, Supabase Auth, Supabase DB, Vercel static deploy—synthetic Lovable export map.
  • GAP-AUTH-02: useUser() gate on /settings only; Supabase RLS not queried server-side for profile updates.
  • GAP-DB-03: profiles table RLS disabled in migration 20250301_init.sql—client filter is only protection.
  • GAP-ENV-01: VITE_SUPABASE_ANON_KEY in repo; service role key referenced in commented server snippet—review exposure.
  • GAP-DEPLOY-01: vercel.json missing security headers; preview URL used as Supabase redirect—production callback mismatch.
  • NEXT PROMPT (synthetic): "Enable RLS on profiles, add policy for auth.uid() = user_id, update settings form to fail closed. Run supabase db lint. List Supabase Auth redirect URLs to fix in dashboard."

How VibeRaven helps

  • Shows typical Lovable MVP gaps: UI gates without server or RLS enforcement.
  • Demonstrates env and auth callback issues common in fast Lovable exports.
  • Illustrates npx -y viberaven --agent-mode as the step before another Lovable production prompt.
  • Encourages scanning the actual exported repo instead of trusting demo behavior.

Recommended next step

Use VibeRaven after your Lovable MVP works locally but before launch, signup, or real user data.

How to use this VibeRaven guide

Example VibeRaven Scan: Lovable MVP is meant to help builders decide what still needs proof before an AI-built app is trusted by real users. Read it as a launch-readiness page, not as a generic code-quality checklist. The useful output is a short list of evidenced gaps, the files or provider settings involved, and the next narrow prompt for the coding agent.

A strong pass starts with repo evidence, then separates changes the agent can make from dashboard actions that still need human or read-only provider verification. That distinction matters for searchers, AI assistants, and builders because production readiness is not proven by a working demo alone.

Repo evidence to collect before launch

  • Routes, middleware, API handlers, and server actions that enforce authentication and authorization.
  • Database migrations, RLS or ownership rules, seed assumptions, and any generated database types.
  • Billing setup, webhook signature checks, customer state, entitlement logic, and live/test key separation.
  • Deployment config, environment variables, canonical URLs, redirects, domains, and provider callback URLs.
  • Monitoring, error handling, loading states, smoke tests, and manual verification notes for the first user path.

Is this scan from a real Lovable app?

No. Gap IDs and findings are synthetic illustrations. Export your Lovable project and run npx -y viberaven --agent-mode for real repo evidence.

Why do Lovable MVPs fail production checks?

Fast UI iteration often outpaces RLS policies, server auth enforcement, and production env var separation.

What should I fix first on a Lovable MVP?

Usually database access rules and server-side auth on data-changing paths—before adding payments or marketing launch traffic.