Recover engineering capacity lost
to context, review and rework.

THE COST OF THE HUMAN CONTEXT LAYER

Your team lead is too expensive
to be the search box for the product.

1. Business
2. Ticket
3. Developer
4. Question
5. Team lead
6. Code · docs · meeting
7. Answer

Now multiply that by every change, every developer, every service and every agent you have running. It is not a communication problem — it is an operating cost, and it is paid at senior engineering rates.

• interruption hours
• context hours
• review hours
• rework hours

WHAT THE ENGAGEMENT IS MEASURED ON

This is what we sign around.

The final metrics depend on the workflow you select and on what GitMir can reasonably influence — both of which are agreed before the engagement starts, not claimed on a landing page.

TEAM IS FOR A COST THE AUDIT CAN ALREADY SEE

When this is the right level —
and when it is not.

If that second column is you, the honest answer is the open-source engine, or Connect at $19 a developer. Both are on this site, and neither of them needs us.

WHERE THE VALUE ACTUALLY IS

Installing GitMir is easy.
Making it understand your organization is where the value starts.

Every production team has its own way of being itself, and none of it is written down in one place. A generic configuration does not pick that up on its own — which is what the implementation is for.

• architecture
• business domain
• repositories
• release process
• task system
• AI tools
• naming
• approval rules
• reporting
• legacy constraints

THE IMPLEMENTATION

Five steps, in this order.

1. 01 — MODEL

   We map your real product.

   • Domain objects and the rules that govern them
   • States and the transitions between them
   • Services, APIs and what they owe each other
   • Processes, dependencies, permissions and where the risk sits

   A product model the team recognizes as its own.

2. 02 — INTEGRATE

   We connect the systems your team already uses.

   • Repositories — GitHub, GitLab, whatever you host yourself
   • Task and delivery — Jira, Linear, your own board
   • CI/CD, observability and the checks you already run
   • Internal APIs, documentation and dashboards

   If it is part of your engineering workflow, it can be connected — through adapters and APIs, built in the engagement.

3. 03 — CONFIGURE THE AGENTS

   We give your coding agents the context your product requires.

   • The local MCP and what it is allowed to answer
   • Context projection: the slice a task actually needs
   • Skills written for the work your team repeats
   • Approval gates, task structure, verification rules and stop conditions

   Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and your own agents, through the same adapters.

4. 04 — BUILD THE VIEWS

   Different people see the same product at the level they need.

   • The developer — what exactly does this task touch?
   • The tech lead — what is changing across my team right now?
   • The product manager — does the implementation match what was approved?
   • The client or stakeholder — what was asked for, what changed, what is still open?

   One model, four readings of it — not four documents that disagree.

5. 05 — IMPROVE

   The implementation gets better as the team uses it.

   • Corrections a human made, kept as rules
   • Decisions, and the conflict each one settled
   • Previous changes and what they turned out to touch
   • The evidence that a change was actually verified

   The second change should cost less context than the first.

THE OUTCOME

Your team should spend less time reconstructing context.

It is working when the team can understand and execute a complex change with less context reconstruction, fewer rounds of clarification and less avoidable rework. Not when more boxes are ticked.