Use cases

So what do you actually do with Undernap?

You give a request as a goal — not as a prompt. These four cases show what Undernap then coordinates, where you decide, and what you end up holding at the end.

Software engineering

Check a repository before a release

Your request: “Analyse this repository read-only: name the three biggest product risks and one safe next step for each.”
What Undernap coordinates: Undernap builds a read-only plan, staffs the analysis over your connected coding accounts, and has the result checked against the request.
Where you decide: You approve the plan — including the read-only limit — and you accept at the end.
What comes out: A risk report with file- and line-level evidence, checked by an instance that is not its author.

SEO / GEO

Audit a website — without invented numbers

Your request: “Check our public website for technical, content and discoverability issues and tell me what to fix first.”
What Undernap coordinates: The SEO/GEO specialist collects findings across public pages and marks every statement as observed, derived or inferred.
Where you decide: You approve the scope — which domain, how deep — and decide which findings become tasks.
What comes out: A sorted audit: findings with their grade, priority and reasoning — no metric without a provenance.

Research

Research a market and its competitors

Your request: “Research the five most important vendors for [X] and tell me where we are different.”
What Undernap coordinates: The research specialist works the question, separates observation from conclusion, and documents where the picture stays unclear.
Where you decide: You approve the plan with its source scope and decide whether going deeper is worth new cost.
What comes out: A briefing with evidenced statements, clearly marked assumptions and open questions — instead of a smooth narrative.

Marketing

Campaign drafts with a fact check

Your request: “Draft three positionings for our product and check each against what we can actually evidence.”
What Undernap coordinates: The marketing specialist drafts; the check holds every statement against the project knowledge and marks what is merely a claim.
Where you decide: You approve the plan, pick a direction — and you are the last authority before anything goes public.
What comes out: Three positionings graded statement by statement: evidenced, derived, or wishful.

The roles

Five specialists exist today

Roles are ways of working with a quality bar — not models. Which model runs a session is settled by your Fleet and the plan.

Software engineering

Repository work with limits: read, analyse, implement — every change an evidenced step.

SEO / GEO

Check public pages and grade findings so you know what is hard evidence and what is assumption.

Research

Work the question, separate the sources, name the uncertainty instead of smoothing it over.

Marketing

Drafts and positionings — with a check that takes claims at their word.

Knowledge & support

Answers from your project knowledge, with the place the knowledge actually lives.

What these cases are not

No promise of automatic outcomes: every mission needs your plan approval, and “done” is a verification result, not autopilot. These cases show roles that exist in the app — not benchmark numbers and not customer stories. Those are not here until they are real.

Your case may be a different one

The Founder Beta opens in small steps — and we listen to what it actually gets used for.

Request Founder Beta access Result & evidence

Founding Beta for macOS (Apple Silicon, macOS 12+). Nothing is sold yet and there is no public download — access goes through the Founder Beta.