Tentative Article: “AI Code Rescue Is Becoming Contract Work. Don’t Quote It Like a Bug Fix.” Who Should Respond: Independent developers who completed AI-code rescue jobs; clients who commissioned them; software auditors who scope inherited systems; agency technical directors who approve estimates. The Request: I’m reporting on contractors hired to repair or finish AI-generated applications. I want firsthand cases showing how the work was assessed, priced, and bounded, including repairs that became rebuilds or were declined. Questions: - What did an inherited AI-generated application actually need when you examined it? - What did you deliver during discovery before quoting implementation? - Which hidden issue changed the estimate, and by how much? - How did you define acceptance and responsibility for pre-existing defects? - When would you decline the job or recommend a rebuild? Submission Requirements: - Responses must be original, written in the named source's own words, and grounded in direct professional knowledge or experience. AI-generated, generic, ghostwritten, or promotional responses will not be considered. - Answer at least three relevant questions with substantive, quotable responses, ideally 75–150 words each. - Include your full name, current title, organization, and personal LinkedIn profile for verification. - Confirm that your response may be quoted and attributed. Disclose relevant commercial interests. - Do not submit product promotion unless the product is directly material to the question.