Who is it for?
One promise, seen from five angles.
A leader, a developer and someone with no engineering team are not buying the same thing. The product is the same one: a functional map kept current by execution.
The product map stops depending on your memory
You describe features in plain language, you settle decisions as a team, and you can see at any moment where everything stands - without reading the code or chasing the developers. You never write a prompt: the approved spec is the prompt.
- A feature tree with status, versions and an owner
- Product decisions discussed, voted, dated - then injected into the agent
- Goals, promises and verdicts: what was expected, and what came out
- 🧩 The product as a tree, not as tickets
- ⚖️ Decisions still findable six months later
- 🎯 A verdict per promise kept or missed
Frame agentic work instead of absorbing it
Your organisation's rules are injected into every session, and when an agent argues against one it opens a decision - a human settles it. Your developers keep coding in their editor: branches and merge requests are attached automatically, with nothing to change in their habits.
- Organisation constraints at three levels: mandatory, strong, preference
- Hand-written code follows exactly the same cycle as the agent's
- Work done outside Survol is detected and offered for attachment, never reported on
- 🛡 Your rules applied to every session
- 🤝 Humans and agents on the same record
- 👀 The review queue finally visible
What the AI produced, not only what it cost
Everyone can tell you what your AI consumed last month. Nobody can tell you what it delivered. Survol attaches every euro to a feature, and every feature to a goal on which somebody gives a dated verdict.
- Spend split between what met its goal and what did not
- One verdict per promise: met, partly met, not met - or “impossible to tell”
- Zero lock-in: the code, the repositories and the plans stay yours
- 💶 Cost per delivered feature
- ⚖️ A dated verdict, not an impression
- 🚪 Full reversibility
More projects at constant headcount, and billable consumption
Each client is a product, with its own map, goals and isolated consumption. You know what each engagement really cost in AI, which makes re-invoicing possible - and you show the client a view they understand without being technical.
- A portfolio of products inside one organisation, kept apart
- Consumption traceable per client, per feature and per version
- A view the end client can read, without opening your repository
- 📦 One product per engagement
- 💶 What each engagement cost
- 👤 A non-technical client view
From the idea to a live product, with no engineering team
You describe your product in plain language. Survol structures it, steers it and hands the development to an agent - with a managed mode if you have neither an AI plan nor a developer machine. You keep the vision; the tool keeps the map.
- A deliberately light Framing mode while the map does not exist yet
- Managed mode: nothing to install, nothing to configure
- A preview to approve in one click before anything reaches production
- Technical experts hired with a single click for a code review
- 💡 Your idea structured into features
- 🤖 The agent writes and ships
- 🚀 You approve the preview
Five doors, one product
These are not five offers nor five price lists: it is the same tool, and everyone comes in through what hurts. The segment we push in the beta is the first one - teams of 5 to 100 people already using a coding agent.