Pricing

We don't charge for access.
We charge for the memory we keep true.

Never per person. Add anyone, add any number of agents, and the price doesn't move.

The model

Band pricing, sized by the connected user base, not by seats.

You pick the scope of the organisation whose work flows into DocBrain. That scope sets the band. Inside the band you get unlimited people and unlimited AI agents, whether that is Claude Code, Cursor or CI jobs, plus unlimited questions, captures and generated docs.

There is no per-user counter anywhere in the product, and no per-user line on the invoice. The fee is fixed by the band. It does not move with how many people or agents actually use it.

"Users in connected scope" means the population whose sources are plugged in: one org, a division, or the whole company. You choose. That is also how the account grows: connect more of the org, move up a band. Expansion is a scope conversation, never a per-head negotiation with your finance team.

The ladder

List prices.

Annual list price
Band Users in connected scope Annual, flat
Communityup to 25Free, forever
Growth26 – 100$10,000
Scale101 – 300$25,000
Enterprise301 – 750from $60,000
Enterprise+751 – 2,000Contact us
Global2,001 and upContact us

Annual, paid up front.

The split

What's free, and what you'd pay for.

Free forever

The entire product

Genuinely. This is not a crippled tier. Everything below is in the version you can self-host today, in production, at any size.

Every connector Ingestion & search Answers with citations Document generation IDE & agent integration CLI Dashboard Slack Quality scoring Freshness tracking Contradiction detection Review workflows Ownership & governance Access controls SSO Audit logging Autopilot Docker & Kubernetes Unlimited users Unlimited agents

Why give away this much: the product only works if knowledge gets captured everywhere. Anything we gate reduces what gets captured, which makes the product worse for you and weakens the thing that makes us hard to replace. The free tier is our distribution and our proof.

What paying adds

A relationship, not a feature gate

We don't hold features back to create a reason to pay. What you get is us, on the hook and reachable.

  • The people who built it. Not a support queue. Direct access to the engineers who wrote the code, for deployment, tuning and upgrades.
  • Influence over what ships next. Priority input on the roadmap, and we build the connectors you name.
  • A commercial agreement. Written terms your legal and procurement teams can actually sign against, rather than an as-is public licence.

If you need something specific written into a contract, whether that is a response-time commitment, indemnity, escrow or a particular deployment model, tell us what your team requires and we'll tell you plainly whether we can commit to it today.

The argument

Why we refuse to price per seat.

Per-seat punishes you for using the product

With a seat-based tool, every person you add costs more, so companies ration access. But this product gets better the more people and systems feed into it. We're not going to charge you for making it work.

AI agents break per-seat pricing outright

Coding agents both read from and write to DocBrain, and in a large engineering org agent traffic will overtake human traffic. Every per-seat vendor has to decide whether a bot counts as a seat, and both answers are bad ones. Ours is one line: agents are free, and agents make your knowledge base better.

We can afford to, and it isn't generosity

DocBrain runs in your own infrastructure using your own AI provider. Every extra question costs us essentially nothing, so unlimited usage is something we can actually offer rather than a promise we'd have to claw back.

"Only 40 people will really use it"

Then connect 40 people's sources and pay the band that fits. You set the scope. And if that scope is 25 users or fewer, you pay nothing at all.

Straight answer

Where our commercial terms actually stand

We're an early company and we'd rather you heard this from us than found it out in a procurement review. Our commercial paperwork is still being finalised, and we are not going to publish a support SLA, an indemnity clause or a quality guarantee before we can stand behind it in writing. Several of those are being drafted now.

So if you need contractual commitments, the honest process is a conversation: tell us what your team requires, and we'll tell you what we can commit to today, what's coming, and what we can't do yet. You will not get a yes from us on something we can't deliver.

What isn't in question: the product is free to run in production at any size, forever, and nothing gets switched off if you stop paying. The licence we publish grants you permanent production use. That's a legal right you hold, not a promise you have to trust us on.

Next

Tell us the scope. We'll tell you the number.

Or run it free for as long as you like first. Most people should.