We narrowed PromptBrake into a simple pre-release check for LLM endpoints
We posted PromptBrake here a while ago.
Since then, the biggest change wasn’t features — it was clarity.
At first, we were building something around “AI security.” That turned out to be too vague to be useful.
What teams actually needed was much simpler:
👉 “Does the LLM endpoint we’re about to ship break in obvious ways?”
So we narrowed PromptBrake to that.
Today, it runs a fixed set of tests (12 categories / 60+ attack scenarios) directly against the API endpoint — checking things like prompt injection, leakage, and unsafe tool behavior.
The important part isn’t the score. It’s seeing why something failed and what to fix.
We also made the flow more practical:
- demo first (no setup)
- then real endpoint scan
- results with evidence + remediation
Still intentionally narrow. Not a pentest. Not monitoring. Just a fast, repeatable check before you ship.
This is where the real value lies. If PromptBrake tells me how it broke the endpoint and what I should change in my system prompt or model parameters to fix it, you’ve moved from being a "critic" to a "collaborator."
Exactly. That’s the goal: not just showing that something broke, but how it broke and what to change in your prompt or model setup to fix it. That’s when PromptBrake becomes a collaborator, not just a critic. There’s also a case study if you want to see how it behaves in practice https://promptbrake.com/case-study