Your CI is slow, and everyone who offers to fix it is guessing. Static analyzers estimate from your YAML without ever running it. Runner vendors just sell you a bigger machine. We do it the other way around: we run the before-and-after on your own CI and measure exactly what's recoverable, before you commit to anything. Then we build the fix and prove the number holds.
The problem worth money
It's a payroll problem. Every build your engineers wait on is context-switching and queue time you pay for in salary, and it grows with headcount and merge frequency. Cycle time is the value and the runner bill is a rounding error.
How it works
A read-only pass over your workflow config with no code runs, and we never touch your source beyond the workflow files. You get a ranked breakdown of where the time goes, what's recoverable, and roughly how many dev-hours/month it costs. It names the problems, not the fixes.
$49, credited in full against a sprint
We run controlled, interleaved before/after experiments on your own CI and hand you a measured number. Not "we estimate ~30%" but "we measured +18%, 95% confidence, here's the interval." That real measured number is what goes in the contract.
~$1.5–3K, credited against the sprint
We implement the measured wins as normal, reviewable PRs on your repo, merged by your team. Every change is re-verified on your CI before we call it done. You merge. We never get or want standing write access.
Fixed fee, scoped to what the diagnostic found
The guarantee
We ship at least the reduction we measured for you in the diagnostic, or the sprint is free.
Most guarantees are marketing. Ours is pinned to a number we measured on your CI, not a percentage anyone made up to close a deal. If your pipeline is already tight and there's no real win, we say so on the scan and pass since we'd rather lose the sale than owe a refund.
Proof, including proof we kill our own bad numbers
What our engine projected for a composed change against webpack/webpack, from the
critical-path model alone.
What ten interleaved runs on real GitHub-hosted CI actually verified (p=0.019, statistically significant). The change was real; the estimate ran roughly 3× hot.
Estimates are free and everyone has one. What you're paying for is the number that survived being tested on your own CI, and the discipline that throws out the ones that don't.
Read the full case study →Teams of ~30–200 engineers, CI wall-clock 20+ minutes, frequent merges. Anyone who's been told "just buy faster runners" and suspects the problem is the config, not the hardware.
Already-tight pipelines with no meaningful headroom. We'll say so on the scan rather than take the engagement.
Pricing
| Step | Price | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| Scan | $49 | Ranked roast which includes wall-clock + dev-hours estimates. Credited against a sprint. |
| Diagnostic | ~$1.5–3K | Measured achievable reduction on your CI; sets the guaranteed floor. Credited against a sprint. Range depends on workflow and repo count. |
| Sprint | ~$5–15K | Implementation + re-verification, measured-floor guarantee. Range depends on workflow and repo count. |
| Full sprint + rollout | ~$15–25K | Long pipelines, many repos, large teams, high merge frequency. |
Runs on GitHub Actions today. No migration. Changes land as normal PRs you review and merge. Your source and secrets never leave your environment.
Book an engagement
We'll follow up to scope a scan in a real conversation with the founder.