A coding rule changes in Git. Before an agent proposes updates to the related instructions, who should hold the model key and control the bill? I'm working on the paid hosted version of Guidefold. The open-source project is available today; the hosted service and this CI agent are still planned. The direction I'm considering is a subscription for the team workflow, with the agent running in your CI and using your own model key. It would propose changes for review, not merge them automatically. A managed option would need a separate usage budget and a hard spending cap. If you manage coding tools for a team, which part would block adoption: storing another API key, approving an external service, or reviewing the proposed edits? What happened the last time you tried something similar? Current demo:
You can reply here. For setup questions or a demo timestamp, the main feedback thread is https://github.com/wiatrM/guidef... Please keep private code and credentials out of replies. I'm the maintainer; this post was drafted with AI assistance.
Your repo instructions changed. Did your coding agent get the right revision? Guidefold keeps instructions beside the code and selects them by directory, with Git as the source of truth. Watch the demo, then tell us which step you would need to verify in your own monorepo. Open source is available now; paid SaaS is planned, not available yet. Demo:
