Product understanding first. Exact code evidence next.
GitMir and Sourcegraph work at different levels. One decides which behavior matters; the other finds the code that proves it. Claude Code makes the change.
KEEP YOUR EXISTING WORKFLOW.
Workflow The two products are used side by side, by a person or by the agent they run. Nothing passes directly between them.
What these tools already do well.
Sourcegraph
- Searches code at the scale of every repository a company owns
- Gives people and agents access to repositories and their history
- Exposes programmatic code analysis to supported clients
GitMir does not stand in for code intelligence. It reasons one level above it and hands the exact question down.
Claude Code
- Explores a repository and reads files in place
- Edits code, runs tools and runs commands
- Follows the instructions a project checks in
- Connects to external systems through MCP
Keep all of that. Add a reusable representation of the product it is working on.
Who does what
- GitMir — which product behavior a task touches, and what changed before
- Sourcegraph — where the implementation evidence is
- Claude Code — the implementation
Two levels, in the order that costs least.
Today
- Task
- Search the code
- Read the evidence
- Work out which behavior matters
- Implement
With GitMir
- Task
- Which product behavior matters
- Where the evidence is
- Implement
Neither layer makes the other unnecessary. Product reasoning narrows the question; code search answers it exactly.
Two levels, in order
- Taskthe work as it was assigned
- GitMirproduct reasoning — what matters and why
- Sourcegraphcode evidence — where it lives
- Claude Codeimplementation
A workflow map. The three products are not wired to each other; the client and the person hold the sequence.
See where one layer hands over to the other.
The public Supabase model answers a product question and then lists the files it stands on — literally the handover point in this workflow.
What could break if subscription cancellation changes?
An example, so you can see the answer without uploading anything of yours.
- Areas it reachesBilling & Subscription · Support · Usage · Project Settings · Organization
- RecordsSubscription · DiskAttributes · OrganizationUsage
- Actions · 9updateOrgSubscription · confirmPendingSubscriptionChange · sendDowngradeFeedback
- Endpoints · 8PUT /platform/organizations/{slug}/billing/subscription · POST /platform/feedback/downgrade
- Screens · 7cancel or downgrade the subscription · change the plan
- Customer pathsChange an organization's plan
One run, published in full.
GitMir has published one measurement, and it does not speak to this combination. It compared context systems answering the same questions about a single repository — a different thing from the workflow this page describes. The full table, every system in it and the method behind it are on the benchmarks page.
Sourcegraph with Claude Code has not been run against Sourcegraph, Claude Code and GitMir on the same repository, so this page claims no result for that combination.
Keep your stack. Add the product layer.
Connect one repository and put the product layer above the search layer you already run.
3,000 STARTING CREDITS INCLUDED · YOU SEE THE ESTIMATE BEFORE A BUILD STARTS · PROCESSING STOPS WITH YOUR BALANCE AND RESUMES AFTER A TOP-UP