Enterprise
AI coding tools multiply the number of pull requests. Architectural review capacity doesn’t grow alongside them. Enola checks the structure of every pull request automatically.
A paid, fixed-scope evaluation on your own repositories. Success criteria agreed before we start.
The problem
Coding assistants produce more pull requests than your senior engineers can meaningfully review. Structural risks accumulate in the gaps.
Boundaries, ownership, and design constraints exist in Slack messages and institutional memory. Enforcement depends on whoever happens to review that day.
A migration or API change crosses team boundaries, services, and languages. By the time the impact is visible, it is already in production.
How it works
Every engagement follows five stages. You know exactly what happens at each step, what you receive at the end, and what it costs before we start.
We agree on what we’re measuring and what counts as a success. Nothing starts without a written shared definition.
We identify the specific rules, boundaries, or regressions to test against. These become the evaluation criteria.
Enola is deployed on your codebase. You get a working installation, not a sandbox or demo environment.
We run the evaluation against the agreed criteria and record results. You see everything we see.
You receive a written recommendation: expand, stop, or hand off to your team. The decision is yours.
Deliverables
Every engagement produces four tangible outputs. Not slides. Not a summary email. Working software and written conclusions.
Enola running on your actual codebase, configured for your rules and boundaries, not a proof of concept.
A clear list of where Enola works as expected and where it doesn’t, including the specific reasons.
Measured against what we agreed at the start. No moving targets, no after-the-fact goal changes.
Expand, stop, or self-operate, with the reasoning written down. You walk away informed either way.
What we track together
Engagement types
Type 01
Convert your existing architectural rules into automated checks that run on every pull request. No more relying on memory or reviewer availability.
Type 02
Map your codebase before a major change. Understand what depends on what before the migration starts, before the acquisition integrates, before the monolith splits.
No SaaS platform to approve. Enola runs entirely inside your infrastructure.
Installs on Linux, macOS, or Windows. No dependencies, no container, no infrastructure to manage.
Enola reads your code locally and produces a report. Your code, graph and findings are never sent anywhere.
No usage counters, no analytics, no crash reporting, no background uploads. Its only network request is a periodic check for a newer release.
No database, no service, no process to keep running. Run it when you need it.
Open source, Apache 2.0. The complete engine is public. Read it, audit it, compile it yourself. No closed core, no license checks, no usage meters.
Is this a fit?
The open-source version is always free. If the problem is simpler than an engagement warrants, install Enola yourself; it takes a few minutes and costs nothing.
A scoped engineering outcome. We configure Enola against your actual system, model the relevant boundaries, implement the constraints and workflow integration, close agreed coverage gaps, and measure the result. You are not paying to unlock the software.
No. It is a paid, fixed-scope engagement, with the scope, fees, and success criteria agreed in writing before work starts. Enola itself is free to use, and you can evaluate it on your own for as long as you like.
Not through Enola. It runs as a local binary with no telemetry; your code, snapshots and findings stay on the machine that produced them. Its only network request is a periodic check for a newer release. How our engineers access your systems during an engagement is agreed as part of the scope.
No. Enola compares each change with a baseline and reports only what the change introduced. Rules can be advisory, ratcheted so existing violations may remain but new ones fail, or strict, and each is introduced at the level the team is ready for.
No. Enola checks structure: dependencies, boundaries, and the rules you declare about them. It complements tests, security scanning, and compliance assessment, and can supply evidence to them, but it does not replace any of them.
You decide, based on the results and our written recommendation. Expand with a deliberate rollout plan, or stop; the implementation remains yours and keeps working either way. Ongoing work is scoped only where the problem genuinely recurs.
Tell us what change, boundary, or rollout you need to make safer; which repositories and teams it affects; and how you would know the engagement worked. We will tell you whether Enola is relevant and, if it is, propose an evaluation scope.
We reply within one working day. If the problem fits Enola, the next step is a short scoping call and a written, fixed-scope proposal.