Relay
Stop repeating yourself to every AI
Start new thread
Alimkhan Yergebayev

Relay - Stop repeating yourself to every AI

by
Relay
•
❌ Every time you open a new AI chat, you paste the same context all over again — your stack, decisions, constraints, where you left off 🛠️ Relay fixes this. It captures what matters from your AI chats and keeps a living project brief ready. One click injects your full context into any fresh conversation 🦾 Via MCP, your IDE agents (Cursor, Claude Code, Windsurf, Codex, etc.) read and write the same brief, synced automatically Works with: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, and more. Free to start

Add a comment

Replies

Best
Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker
📌
👋 Hey Product Hunt! I’m Alimkhan, a solo founder from Kazakhstan, building Relay. The pain: I bounce between Claude, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and their agentic cli tools in the same day. Every time I switch tabs or start a new chat, they forget what I’m building, and what already changed. I was often copy‑pasting the same project brief just to get back to where we left off. So I built Relay, a shared project brief that follows you across AI tools. With Relay you can: • 🧠 Keep a living brief for each project that updates as you chat • ⚡ Inject that brief into any new conversation with one click, so the AI starts “already caught up” • 🌐 Use the same context across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, Grok and more • 👨‍💻 For devs: use the MCP integration so IDE/CLI agents (Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, etc.) read and write to the same brief as your browser chats Relay’s Chrome Web Store extension was just approved and this is still early - I’m shipping fast and would love your feedback. 💡 A couple questions for you: • When you switch between AI tools, what actually needs to persist vs what should be forgotten? • If Relay could reliably remember 3–5 things about your current project, what would you pick first? 🙌 I’ll be in the comments all day, would love to hear how you currently handle context across tools and what you’d want Relay to do better.
Sergey

@alimkhan_y for me, what should persist: stack + versions, current sprint goal, key architectural decisions plus the ones we rejected, naming conventions, last 'state of play'. what should be forgotten: random debugging tangents, throwaway one-off questions, anything we reverted. the brief should feel like a living readme, not a chat log.

Khashayar Mansourizadeh

@alimkhan_y Congrats, every day I have this challenge, but I solve it by keeping a clean set of md files in my repos and always instructing the agents to keep them updated (e.g. build plan, architecture, progress, audit, summary, etc.). I was curious to know how it would be different from that and what would be the added value/benefit here?

Btw, very cool product and love the website!

Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker

@khashayar_mansourizadeh1 Thank you, and that markdown-file workflow is exactly the closest manual workaround today. The difference is that Relay makes it shared across tools, searchable/recallable by the agent, and easier to keep focused on durable project state rather than a pile of files that every agent has to be re-taught to read and maintain. The added value is less ceremony and fewer stale docs while still keeping the context inspectable.

Khashayar Mansourizadeh

@alimkhan_y Nice, thanks for explanation

Dmitrii Volosatov

The pain is real — every new Claude/GPT/Cursor session starts from zero and you spend the first 5 minutes re-explaining your stack. A shared context layer that just follows you across tools is the right fix. What happens when context gets stale or contradictory — does Relay surface that, or does it trust whatever was saved last?

Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker

@dmitrii_volosatov Great question. Relay does not blindly trust every saved note forever. The idea is to keep context inspectable and updateable: agents can recall what was saved, then overwrite, supersede, or clean up stale context as the project changes. We’re leaning hard into “living context,” not an append-only memory dump.

Rivra

The 'stop repeating yourself' pitch hits home. Does Relay sync your context across different LLM interfaces (like ChatGPT and Claude) simultaneously?

Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker

@rivra_dev Yes, that’s the goal. Relay gives different AI clients a shared project memory layer, so Claude, ChatGPT/Codex, Cursor, etc. can pick up the same brief, decisions, tasks, and project context instead of each starting cold.

Nick Naumov
Yeah, it’s a huge pain point actually, it’s great to see a solopreneur trying to fix this problem. Wishing you a great luck!
Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker

@nikita_naumov Thank you Nick, really appreciate the support. That pain point is exactly why I started building Relay.

TJ Clayton

This is painfully relatable. I run a 3 person startup and we use Claude, Claude Code, and ChatGPT across the team. the context re-pasting is real. Solo founder from Kazakhstan building this is impressive too. Good luck today!

Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker

@tjclayton Thank you TJ, really appreciate it. That cross-tool context re-pasting is exactly the pain Relay is trying to remove.

Igor Martynyuk

Goated idea, real problem i've been suffering from myself. Building in the same space, tried their product and LOVED it. Congrats on the launch guys! Good luck

Alimkhan Yergebayev
Maker
Harshal Chaudhary

the copy-paste project brief problem is real, i do this multiple times a day. question though, the brief "updating as you chat" sounds good in theory but who decides what's worth keeping? if i'm debugging something that turned out to be a dead end, i don't want that in my brief. how do you handle noise vs signal in what gets persisted?

Bhuvika Mehta

The MCP read+write part is what separates this from just a fancy clipboard. If Cursor or Claude Code can actually update the brief as they work, the context stays current without you manually maintaining it. What I'm curious about is conflict resolution when two agents write to the same brief simultaneously...like if I have Cursor working on a feature in one window and Claude Code doing something else in another, and both try to update the project state at the same time, what wins?