Truth, not motion

AI made your team write more code. Revenue stayed flat. Minus the AI bill. Zamski tells you why.

I built this because I've watched companies I cared about run out of runway behind a green dashboard.

Eli

For teams small enough to still move fast, and already big enough to collide.

Free. DPA day one. Read-only. 30 days. Delete on request. SOC 2 Type II.

Outcome intelligence on public repos

Real findings on real repos.

One finding: hoxyq, eps1lon, and jackpope all edited packages/shared in the same 14-day window on facebook/react. Zero cross-reviews. Findings like that across the repos below.

Every Claude Code session opens with the team's aim already in the context window.

⚠ZamskiExample session context

The team is aimed at: Q3 enterprise-tier launch.

+This file is on the merge plan for the launch
!Two PRs are open in the same directory. Cross-reviews: zero.
-No Slack decision recorded on the refactor direction yet.

The session starts knowing the aim. The engineer decides what to do.

Works in Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf via MCP.

The work that decides the quarter never lives in one tool.

GitHub shows what is being merged. Jira shows what was promised. Slack shows what is stuck. Calendar shows who is in the room. Only together do they tell you whether the work is moving toward the goal.

We call the gap between those four systems The Offline. The work that happened, mattered, and decided whether you hit the quarter, but was never connected across the systems of record. By the time it surfaces in a retro, the window the company needed to win is already closed.

Zamskifacebook/react, packages/shared: three engineers, zero cross-reviews. The work was drifting before anyone filed it.

What Zamski Answers

Is your team's output moving the business?

Zamski reads what your team already wrote down: Jira epics, OKR docs, Slack pinned decisions, the planning artifacts you have. Then it reads what your team actually shipped across the four systems and tells you whether the two match, in plain English. Nothing new to declare.

  • ·Uses the aim you already declared in Jira, OKR docs, and Slack. No new system to adopt.
  • ·Names the engineers, the files, and the gap in plain English.
  • ·Surfaced before the retro names it for you.
Reads four systemsGitHub, Jira, Slack, Calendar
Math finds itDeterministic correlations, auditable in procurement
Narrative tells youPlain English. No charts. No chatbot guessing.

See if your team's output is aimed

Three engineers. One directory. Zero cross-reviews.

Nobody filed it. The work wrote it. Real finding on facebook/react. The kind of drift Zamski names before it shows up in a missed quarter.

ARC Narrative - AI Synthesized, Cycle 3

Coordination Gap in packages/shared

facebook/reactForming42 detection windowsZero cross-reviews
hoxyq, eps1lon, and jackpope all modified packages/shared within the same 14-day window. PR #35918 by hoxyq merged while PR #35985 by eps1lon was still open in the same directory. PR #36026 by jackpope landed three days later touching overlapping files. Zero cross-reviews between them.
^ Pattern confirmed across 42 detection windows
^ Three PRs in the same 14-day window touching overlapping files
> Related: review bottleneck on hoxyq as author (56 PRs awaiting first review)
Public-repo example, so this finding is GitHub-only. On a customer who grants the full four-system OAuth, the same finding extends into Slack decisions, Jira commitments, and the calendar context that puts a date on the drift.
Zamski surfaces this finding because the pattern would otherwise stay between the systems. It does not assign blame or require action. You decide what it means.

One finding. Seven days. Free.

Free · DPA day one · Read-only · Delete after 30 days, or sooner if you ask