Fluo

We find builders by
their taste.

AI made writing code nearly free. The scarce thing is judgment. Fluo reads code and measures the taste behind it.

↑ type a real GitHub handle — it reads your public repos, live.
See it run
Measure · Verify · Connect

    
Builders wanted
Tinder for pair programming.

Two builders, one radar. See where your skills fill each other's gaps and where your taste lines up.

×
two radars, waiting to mesh — enter handles or tap a pairing ↓

Assessing a whole team? → Team Fit (the enterprise view)

The bet
Everyone measures output.
We measure judgment.

The rest

  • Count lines, PRs, velocity
  • Catch bugs after the fact
  • Score model outputs
  • Taste is a vibe in someone's head
  • Fluo

  • Measures verification-first instinct & taste
  • Learns from exemplary repos as a curriculum
  • Verifies its own claims against the code
  • Finds builders whose taste complements yours
  • 01 · Measure

    Fingerprint the taste in code

    Six axes + tags like verification-first, from any repo — a cheap prior sharpened by a model that reads the content.

    02 · Improve

    Diff yourself against the best

    See where your taste falls short of exemplary repos and get concrete upgrades.

    03 · Connect

    Find builders who complement you

    Read-only, in-product. People whose skills fill your gaps and whose taste you share.

    It keeps itself honest. The judge must cite evidence; a verifier checks the evidence actually exists in the repo. The self-improvement loop only keeps a change if it beats a held-out anchor — it can't flatter itself into confident nonsense.

    Read-only and private by design. It clones and reads; it never writes to GitHub. Talent matching is in-product suggestion only — matched on technical signals only, with no personal data stored.

    For your whole team
    We have a solution for your company.

    Don't just read one builder. See whether a whole team will ship, who to add to fill the gaps, and what getting fit wrong is costing you.

    Team Fit

    Will this team gel?

    Every pairwise match, the overall composition, and the gaps to hire for — from public code.

    Assess a team →

    Swarm Search

    Find the few in millions

    A fleet of agents searches an opt-in index and surfaces only the mutual, intent-matched few.

    See the vision →

    ROI

    Cost of getting it wrong

    Regretted hires, wasted interview loops, slow teams. Move the sliders to your reality.

    Do the math →

    Swarm Search · Enterprise
    Find the few that matter in millions.

    Deploy a fleet of agent-finders across a read-only index. A token-disciplined cascade narrows the haystack; we contact only the opted-in, mutually-matched few — never cold outreach.

    ◆ Concept — the architecture we're building; figures are illustrative.

    open full screen ↗

    Questions
    FAQ
    Is this read-only? Do you store my data?

    Yes — GET-only. We clone and read public code; we never write to GitHub, and we match on technical signals only (axes + taste), never name, location, or timezone. No personal data is stored beyond a derived fingerprint and a public handle.

    Isn't GitHub a weak signal — my best work is private?

    Fair. We read what's public, and the deep read judges the actual code, not stars or follower counts. For at-work/private code, analysis is opt-in and consented. A quiet public profile isn't a verdict on you.

    Can "taste" really be measured?

    We don't claim to bottle it. We measure observable proxies — verification-first instinct, where effort lands, architectural restraint — and validate them against ground truth: real collaborators cohere on shared taste, and distributed ownership predicts shipping velocity (r≈−0.56). The judge cites evidence, and a verifier checks it exists in the code.

    How is the team-fit score computed?

    Distributed ownership (low bus factor) is the dominant validated predictor of shipping velocity, so it leads the formula, with shared values and coverage second. Bus factor needs commit history, so the public number stays honest about what it can't yet measure.

    Won't people just game it?

    It reads revealed behavior across a whole body of work — far harder to fake than a résumé or one interview — and the evidence-grounding verifier rejects any claim it can't find in the code.

    What does it cost?

    Reading your taste and matching is free. Enterprise Team Fit is a per-seat subscription. Do the math on what getting fit wrong is costing you today.

    Stay in the loop
    Get early access.