Not a gate
GREPHT stays advisory.
It informs the build. It does not sit in front of it as an approval step, and it is not a monitoring layer over your team.
For teams
Turn individual builds into shared capability.
GREPHT helps teams understand, reuse, change, operate, and hand off the software people build — across engineering, operations, GTM, finance, support, and everywhere else software is now made.
- Team
- $149 / month for up to 10 people, billed per workspace.
- History
- A year of it, so an argument about what changed has an answer.
- Trace
- Available as a $79/month workspace add-on when a question needs a worked analysis.
- Not metered
- No per-tool, per-workflow or per-connector charges. Ever.
Shared context
Know what your teammates already solved.
Surface reusable patterns and prior work before duplicated implementations become another maintenance burden.
- 01
One answer, not one per laptop
Two people ask their agents the same question today and get two different answers, and neither of them finds out. A shared record is the only thing that closes that gap.
- 02
Ownership without overhead
Understand who built, owns, and operates a system without a separate inventory workflow — including the person who has been committing for a fortnight and is named nowhere.
- 03
Coordinate changes
See consumers, dependencies, and timing before one team's change surprises another.
- 04
Preserve continuity
Make a handoff or a role change less dependent on one person's memory.
Engineering and everyone else
Software is being built well outside engineering. It still has to keep running.
The product is the same on both sides of that line. The reason to want it is not, so GREPHT does not ask a revenue-operations lead to read an engineering pitch.
Inside engineering
- Today
- Ownership lives in a CODEOWNERS file that is one reorg out of date, dependencies are known by whoever was on the incident, and the agent writing half the code reads only the repo it was pointed at.
- With GREPHT
- Impact and ownership come from what is actually observed, and the same context reaches the coding agent through MCP instead of being re-explained in every prompt.
Outside engineering
- Today
- Someone in operations wires up an automation that now sits between two systems the company runs on. It works. It is documented nowhere, monitored by nothing, and understood by one person.
- With GREPHT
- The same work gets a record, a runbook and a heartbeat — without a ticket, a review board, or anyone being told they should not have built it.
Nobody is told they should not have built the thing. The point of a shared record is that the work counts — not that it gets reviewed.
The outcome
Decentralize software creation without fragmenting the architecture.
The organization gains continuity because builders become more capable—not because GREPHT adds another approval process.
Not another inventory
No parallel system to maintain.
Context is derived from the tools the team already builds in, so it does not decay the moment someone stops updating it.
Not per-person reporting
The estate, never the person.
GREPHT is built to show what exists and how it connects. There is no per-builder activity feed and no notification to a manager when someone ships.
Not priced to punish you
Nothing is metered by tool count.
GREPHT gets better the more of your work it understands, so it would be self-defeating to charge you for showing it more. Plans scale with people.
GREPHT