Show IH: CheckAPI – API monitoring that catches silent failures, not just HTTP 200

잠긴 계정에서 Cloudflare 빌링이 200 반환하는 거 —
그게 딱 보이지 않다가 갑자기 보이는 장애 패턴이에요.
9시간은 알게 되기까지 긴 시간이죠.

False positive에 대해서 — 타당한 우려예요, 처리 방식은 이렇습니다:

1. 연속 실패 임계값
   단일 실패 체크는 알림을 발생시키지 않아요.
   여러 체크에 걸쳐 지속적인 실패만 알림을 트리거해요.
   일회성 스키마 히컵으로 새벽 3시에 아무도 안 깨어나요.

2. 상태 변화만
   알림은 상태 전환 시에만 발생해요 — 정상 → 다운, 다운 → 정상.
   매번 실패한 체크마다가 아니에요. 그래서 회복되는 불안정한 응답이
   폰을 스팸하지 않아요.

3. Maintenance Window
   계획된 배포, 스키마 마이그레이션, 의도적인 변경 —
   특정 윈도우 동안 모니터링을 뮤트할 수 있어서
   예상된 변경이 알림을 트리거하지 않아요.

솔직한 답변은: assertion을 업데이트하지 않고 스키마를 바꾸면
페이지 날아와요. 근데 그건 버그가 아니라 기능이에요 —
assertion은 API와의 계약이에요.
스키마 변경 = 계약 파기 = 누군가 알아야 함.

해결책은 배포 후가 아니라 배포 전에 assertion을 업데이트하는 거예요.

Hey! Really appreciate you reaching out.

"Where CheckAPI catches the issue, SPB is how you tell your users about it" —
that's a clean way to put it. Genuinely complementary products.

CheckAPI actually has a built-in Public Status Page too, but the focus is
different — ours is tied directly to monitor results,
yours sounds more polished for user-facing communication.

Would love to compare notes on distribution.
Indie SaaS targeting devs is a tough audience to reach before something breaks.

Let's connect!

Great question — you nailed the exact pain point most tools miss.

Right now, CheckAPI handles semantic failures through Keyword + Regex validation on the response body.
You define what “good” or “bad” looks like directly in the monitor settings (e.g. "status":"ok", userId exists, count > 0, or any regex pattern).

It’s deliberately simple so it doesn’t turn into a full test framework. You’re not writing assertions in code — just telling us what string or pattern should (or should not) be present.

On false positives: because it’s keyword/regex based and you control the exact pattern, false positives are actually quite low once set up correctly. We also give you a “test alert” button so you can verify before going live.

JSON Path + more structured assertions are already on the near-term roadmap (we know many people want to check nested fields, array lengths, etc. without regex).

Would love to hear your take — what kind of semantic checks have bitten you the most in the past? (empty arrays, wrong status inside 200, stale timestamps, etc.)

Happy to show you exactly how it works if you want.

Thanks for the thoughtful comment!

Right now, the vast majority of people (including our first 7 users) come to CheckAPI after they’ve already been burned by a silent failure.

They usually say something like:
“I thought everything was fine because I was getting 200 OK… until customers started complaining.”

That pain is exactly why I built this.

The goal is to help teams shift from reactive firefighting to proactive monitoring — catching the hidden errors before they reach users.

We’re still very early, but that’s the direction we’re heading.

Would love to hear your take — have you ever had a silent failure sneak past your current monitoring?

Thank you! Really appreciate it.

"Completing the task" vs "actually learning" — that's exactly the same problem
I'm solving on the API side. The surface looks fine, but nothing real is happening underneath.

WordyKid sounds genuinely useful. Snapping a worksheet and turning it into a game
is the kind of thing parents will love. Good luck with it! 🚀