Zephr
Read the quick start

Use cases

Find the positionyou're in.

You do not need all of Zephr. You need the part that fits where you stand — working alone, leading a team, or answering a reviewer. Three positions, one memory, and an honest answer about which one you can use today.

Find your position
See how it works
Solo usable today · Team and enterprise plannedpersonal continuityshared memorygoverned retrieval
three positions · one spine

  1. Solo developerusable today

    You cannot remember why you chose it, and neither can the tool.

  2. Team leadplanned

    Four developers, four private versions of the same project history.

  3. Enterpriseplanned

    Someone is going to ask what the agents read and what they wrote.

the badge is the honest one, not the aspirational one

Illustrative example — not live data

Where to start

Pick your position. Get the honest answer.

Three positions, one spine. Choose the one you are in — the panel shows the moment you know, what you can use today, and what is still planned. Planned personas name what is missing before they describe the vision.

Three kinds of developer, one layerSolo: You close a session on Tuesday and reopen the file in another tool a week later, needing the reason you had. Team: Four people answer the same question in four editors, and none of the four answers can reach the other three. Enterprise: A reviewer asks what a claim rests on and which repositories the agent could see when it made it. One record format, one tool contract, one trust model under all three. Moving between these positions changes the blast radius of a decision, not the shape of the record that holds it.SoloTeamEnterprise

  1. Solo

    You close a session on Tuesday and reopen the file in another tool a week later, needing the reason you had.

    Usable today

  2. Team

    Four people answer the same question in four editors, and none of the four answers can reach the other three.

    Not yet built

  3. Enterprise

    A reviewer asks what a claim rests on and which repositories the agent could see when it made it.

    Primitives today · controls not built

One record format, one tool contract, one trust model under all three. Moving between these positions changes the blast radius of a decision, not the shape of the record that holds it.

illustrative journey map — the personas themselves are the product truth

arrow keys switch position

Solo developer

Local mode shipped · Cloud planned

You cannot remember why you chose it, and neither can the tool.

You work alone, across Claude Code and Cursor, on a project that has accumulated a year of decisions you can no longer hold in your head. Local mode is shipped: one SQLite file, no account, recall that shows its sources, and a signed handoff between the two tools. This is the path you can walk today.

What you can use today

  • Local mode — one SQLite file, no account, no card
  • Recall that shows its sources and review state
  • Signed handoff between Claude Code and Cursor
  • TrustBench suite on your machine

Read the solo developer story

every persona starts the same way — one local command

zephr connect
Beyond code

Same ledger. Early channels.

Marketing and sales notes are the same record shape as a coding decision. The capture path is early. Private memory is the shipped personal wall — it is not a fourth persona novel.

  • Campaigns

    The February reasoning is not written anywhere the August draft can reach.

    Brand rules and what worked last quarter are decisions. The memory core can hold them. Non-editor capture is early; there is no marketing suite, and this band does not pretend otherwise.

  • Accounts

    Six months later the customer remembers the promise differently.

    What was promised, when, and by whom is a decision with a source. There is no CRM integration. The ledger stores the commitment; it does not replace the CRM.

Personal notes that must never hit team search live at Private memory. Old /use-cases/marketing and /use-cases/sales URLs redirect here.

What does not change

The same layer under all three.

The stories differ in scope. They do not differ in substance. There is no lighter trust model for one person and no separate memory format for an organization, so moving between these three positions is a change of scale rather than a migration. That matters most when you are the one person: the record you write on a laptop today is the same record a reviewer would read later, so nothing you capture now has to be re-entered to count.

One evidence graph
Bi-temporal beliefs with provenance, confidence, and revision chains. The same record shape whether it lives on one laptop or a managed tenant.
One tool contract
Twenty-five MCP tools (nineteen first-party, six hosted metered extras). Adding a client does not mean re-teaching the project.
One trust model
Authorization before retrieval, immutable scope binding, receipts on every operation, and abstention when the evidence does not clear the bar.

Start where you are.

The solo path works today. The other two are written here with the same honesty they will be built with, and nothing on this page is called available because it is on a roadmap.

See how it worksExplore the platform