[pricing]
Pricing that matches how you deploy.
Free for single developers. Paid tiers scale from best-in-class AI code review into wider framework scope, governance depth, and deployment control. Enterprise stays transparent: no seat-count games, no stacked surprises, and no opaque committer math.
| Tier | Price | Developers | Repos | Frameworks | Deployment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Free Single-developer evaluation with one repository and a lightweight token budget. | $0 | 1 | 1 | Not included | SaaS |
| Pro Developer-led rollout for smaller teams that need a transparent path to evidence generation. | Contact sales | Up to 25 | Up to 10 | SOC 2 | SaaS |
| Team The core plan for regulated engineering teams that want strong review quality and named framework enforcement. | Contact sales | Up to 100 | Up to 50 | All 7 frameworks | SaaS |
| Enterprise Lite Single-tenant and region-sensitive deployments with deeper identity and key controls. | Custom | Custom | Custom | All 7 frameworks | SaaS + VPC |
| Enterprise On-prem and air-gapped deployment with custom frameworks, BYOK, and dedicated support. | Custom | Unlimited | Unlimited | All 7 + custom packs | SaaS, on-prem, air-gapped |
How billing works
Seat-based for developers, with usage metering layered on top. No “contributing committer” windows, no hidden overage language, and no sidecar SKUs to make the final number unknowable.
What changes by tier
Review scale, framework coverage, governance controls, deployment options, and support posture increase as the buying committee widens.
What stays consistent
The same review engine, the same Task Context flow, and the same evidence model from fast evaluation to regulated deployment.
[faq]
Pricing questions procurement will ask anyway.
[cta]
Need the full pricing conversation?
We can scope the review engine first, then add Task Context, compliance packs, governance depth, and deployment requirements around the teams and repositories you actually need to cover.