SOFTWARE PRODUCTION OBSERVABILITY · GENERATED, NOT PURCHASED
Every change has two durations.Only one of them is in your tracker.
The first one is delivery: request to a version that could be reviewed. The second is everything between that and acceptance — the clarification, the rule nobody wrote down, the dependency found in review, the second and third pass. Your tracker records one duration for both, so the expensive half has never had a number.
NOTHING TO BUY · NOTHING TO FILL IN · IT COMES FROM CHANGES YOU HAVE ALREADY MADE
WHERE THE NUMBERS COME FROM
The queue already records it.Nobody has to log anything.
GitMir runs beside your coding agent and keeps the work as tasks: what was asked, what was built, what its checks were, whether they passed, and what had to be redone when they did not. Every round the developer and the agent go through leaves a file. The audit reads those files.
- 01A change is requested and the agent turns it into work.The task carries what it touches and how it will be verified.
- 02The first version arrives.That moment ends the first clock — it is the first thing that could be reviewed.
- 03It does not survive contact.A check fails, or a person says it misunderstood. Either way the next round is another task, linked to the first.
- 04The rounds accumulate.Second pass, third pass, the review after each. All of it hangs off the original request.
- 05It is accepted.The second clock stops. The difference between the two is what nobody was counting.
No developer marks anything. No survey. No time sheet. The loop the team is already in is the measurement.
WHAT IT SEPARATES
Delivery, and everything after it.
AND WHAT EACH NUMBER IS ALLOWED TO CLAIM
Observed is not the sameas recoverable.
Three states, kept apart on purpose. Mixing them is how a measurement turns into a sales figure.
- OBSERVEDTimestamps, states, rounds, review cycles. Facts about what happened, computed from the queue.
- CLASSIFIEDWhy the extra round happened — a missing rule, a late dependency, an unclear request, an ordinary defect. Inferred, and correctable by the team.
- RECOVERABLEThe part of the classified cost we and you agree GitMir can realistically reduce. Not computed. Agreed.
Only the third one is allowed to price anything.
WHAT THE AUDIT IS NOT
It measures workflows.Not people.
The audit reports on changes and the parts of the product they touch — the refund workflow, the permission rules, the billing edge cases. It does not rank developers, and there is no per-person view to turn on. A tool that reports how many attempts somebody needed is a tool developers uninstall, and the developer is the one who installs this.
- Source code never leaves the machine.
- The full product model stays local by default.
- Connect carries change state, timing and the objects you chose to share.
- There is no per-developer breakdown, in the interface or the export.
AND THE OTHER HALF OF WHAT BECOMES VISIBLE
How much it cost is one question.What it was you changed is the other.
The same engine that times the rounds also writes down what the product does — the business areas, the objects, the rules, the states each one moves through. That is what makes an audit actionable rather than merely accurate: you can see which part of the product the expensive workflow runs through, and ask what else touches it.
AFTER THE AUDIT HAS SOMETHING TO SAY
Then the conversationstarts from your numbers.
When the audit shows where the second clock concentrates, we look at it together and agree which part of it is actually addressable — and that agreed figure, not a price list, is what an implementation is scoped and priced against.
QUESTIONS
- Is this a paid assessment?
- No. It is generated by using GitMir. There is no pilot to buy, no fixed scope and no fee — that offer existed and was withdrawn, because charging for the right to see your own numbers puts a toll booth in front of the evidence.
- Does a developer have to log time?
- No, and that is the point. The rounds between a developer and a coding agent already produce task files with checks and outcomes. The audit reads what the workflow leaves behind rather than asking anybody to record it.
- What if the extra rounds were our fault, not the AI's?
- Then the audit says so. Classification separates a missing product rule from an ordinary defect from a change of scope, and only the parts that a shared product model could realistically have prevented are ever counted as recoverable.
- Can we see it before connecting a team?
- Locally, yes — one developer's own changes. The audit becomes useful when several people working on the same product are connected, because that is when patterns repeat rather than being anecdotes.
- Does our code leave the machine?
- No. Source stays local. Connect carries change state, timing, iteration counts and the model objects you explicitly chose to share.
- Will it show who is slowest?
- No. There is no per-person view and we are not going to add one. The audit reports on workflows and the parts of the product they touch.
- How long before it means anything?
- It depends on how often the team changes the same product and how repetitive the work is. We are not going to publish a number of days we have not measured across enough teams to stand behind.
- What does it cost?
- The open source is free and the audit needs Connect, at $19 per developer per month. Team and Enterprise are scoped and priced from what the audit shows.