Routine steps
Classification, extraction, validation, routing, and repair do not always need the most expensive model in the stack.
Flev DevOps
Send us a failing CI, deploy, or Kubernetes path. Get a diagnosis, evidence trail, and runbook.
Flev DevOps is the first sharp offer in the product line: a narrow, evidence-heavy sprint for teams that already lose time on failed builds, messy releases, Kubernetes debugging, or incident follow-up.
Model Cost And Privacy
Use frontier models only where they matter.
Flev workflows can route routine, structured steps to local or private small models while keeping stronger models available for complex reasoning.
Reviewable routing
Teams should be able to see which model handled which step, why fallback exists, and who can approve changes.
Small-model ready
Better Call evidence shows tool-call accuracy improving from 73.4% to 83.8% on 3,625 granite4.1:3b BFCL v4 cases.
Pilot Offer
A focused 7-day Flev DevOps diagnostic sprint.
Start narrow. One target workflow, one evidence trail, one approval boundary, one operating review. The output should be useful even before a long implementation contract exists.
Day 1
Collect the target repo/service context, CI or deploy path, current runbook, and approval boundary.
Days 2-4
Run the investigation loop: classify the issue, collect evidence, separate facts from gaps, and make the work reviewable.
Days 5-7
Deliver the diagnosis, remediation plan, runbook, incident review format, and next productization scope.
Buyer View
What the sprint produces
The best first buyer is a founder, CTO, engineering manager, or platform team with one painful repo, service, deployment path, or Kubernetes namespace that repeatedly burns engineering time.
Inputs
GitHub Actions failures, repository state, deploy context, Kubernetes events, logs, screenshots, release notes, and existing runbooks.
Workflow
Classify the issue, collect evidence, show what was checked, separate facts from gaps, propose remediation, and route risky actions to approval.
Deliverables
Diagnosis, evidence table, remediation plan, patch or PR plan, release recommendation, runbook, incident review, and approval log.
Success criteria
Pilot scope and boundaries
The first sale should be narrow enough to trust. Flev DevOps starts read-only and asks for approval before any action can change code, packages, deployments, or cluster state.
Time to evidence
A reviewer can see what was checked without reading a chat transcript.
Risk boundary
The workflow clearly separates read-only investigation from push, publish, deploy, rollback, or cluster mutation.
Reusable runbook
The final output is useful the next time the same class of failure appears.
Product path
The team can decide whether this becomes a recurring Flev workflow, not only a one-off analysis.
Included
One repo or service, one CI/deploy/Kubernetes path, one evidence trail, one runbook patch, and one operating review.
Not included
Unbounded platform migration, production mutation without approval, broad security audit, or ongoing incident response retainer.
Access model
Start with links, logs, screenshots, command output, or temporary read-only access. Risky write actions stay outside the default pilot.
Commercial next step
After intake, we confirm the fixed scope, timeline, access boundary, and price before starting the 7-day sprint.
What to send first
What makes it useful after the first answer
A useful first email can be short. The goal is to give us one real failing path, not a perfect requirements document.
- A GitHub Actions run, deploy log, Kubernetes namespace, incident note, or recurring release pain.
- The repo or service name and the workflow owner.
- What a good answer would change: faster diagnosis, safer deploy, clearer rollback, better runbook, or fewer repeated incidents.
Reviewable steps
Engineering detail
Approval Log
Start the intake
Sample Output
A useful sprint should leave artifacts the team can use without us in the room.
The page should make the deliverable concrete before a buyer emails us. These are the artifacts the first Flev DevOps pilot should produce.
Diagnosis brief
A short answer that separates confirmed facts, likely causes, missing evidence, and recommended next action.
Evidence table
A reviewable list of logs, CI steps, Kubernetes events, diffs, and commands used to support the conclusion.
Runbook patch
The repeatable procedure the team can use the next time the same class of failure appears.
Approval record
A clear boundary between read-only investigation and actions such as push, publish, deploy, rollback, or cluster mutation.
Flev DevOps
Start the intake
Choose a paid pilot, not a broad platform conversation.
A useful first email can be short. The goal is to give us one real failing path, not a perfect requirements document.