Mend AI
A security tool that inventories every AI model, prompt, and dataset a company uses and flags risky or unapproved ones.
The AI engine behind Snyk's code scanner, which finds security flaws as code is written and proposes fixes with about 85% accuracy.
DeepCode AI is the AI engine that powers Snyk Code, a static code scanning tool. Developers run Snyk Code inside their editor, command line, or source control platform to catch security vulnerabilities as code is written, and it proposes an automatic fix for many of them. Snyk states the engine was trained on millions of open-source projects with verified fixes, not on customer code, and covers 19 or more programming languages. It ranks each finding by factors like how popular the affected package is and whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable, so teams focus on real risk over raw counts. Snyk reports roughly 85% accuracy on its suggested autofixes.
This fits a team that wants security scanning built into normal developer workflow rather than a separate audit step late in the release cycle. The Free plan allows 100 scans a month across up to five projects, enough to pilot on one or two active repositories; the Team plan starts near $25 per developer per month with higher limits, a plan called Ignite runs near $1,260 per developer per year for organizations under 50 developers, and Enterprise pricing is custom. Treat these as planning estimates and confirm with Snyk. The main risk is over-trusting the roughly 85% accurate autofixes on security-sensitive code without a second review, and free-tier scan limits that a busy team can exhaust quickly.
How one company factor at a time moves the modeled score. The published score is unchanged.
These estimates cover licensing, setup, integrations, staff time, security, administration, and support.
| Cost measure | Low | Base | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| First-year total | $54.4K | $85.5K | $137.2K |
| Three-year total | $118.1K | $177.9K | $274.3K |
| First-year cost per unit | $54.4K | $85.5K | $137.2K |
| Average annual cost per unit (over three years) | $39.4K | $59.3K | $91.4K |
| Component | Low | Base | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| Licensing and usage | $18K | $24K | $32.4K |
| Implementation | $8.4K | $14K | $23.8K |
| Integration | $9.9K | $18K | $32.4K |
| Staff time and change management | $6K | $8.5K | $11.9K |
| Security | $4.6K | $6.5K | $9.8K |
| Administration | $3.4K | $4.5K | $6.1K |
| Support | $1.7K | $2.2K | $3K |
Estimate assumptions: This scenario uses a category-based allowance, not a verified price for this product. Based on 1 production deployment. Confirm the vendor’s billing unit and current price or quote before budgeting.
Benefits have not been estimated: The current research does not estimate potential savings, return on investment, or how long it would take to recover the cost. Earlier benefit estimates are excluded.
Confirm current product identity, commercial packaging, data processing terms, sign-in and access rules, retention, integrations, support model, implementation effort, and rollback conditions.
Verify identity, package, availability, ownership, pricing, and security evidence before approving a pilot
Do not approve a pilot yet. Verify the current product identity, package, availability, owner, pricing, and security evidence; then define one workflow, a baseline, and rollback criteria.
Define what success looks like for a test of Snyk DeepCode AI and assign someone to lead it.
Once the requirements above are met, compare a small trial with how your team works today.
Track adoption, output quality, business results, and actual costs against the estimate.
Use the results to decide whether to stop, adjust, or expand the pilot.
Confirm encryption, how the vendor uses your data, customer data separation, how long data stays and how to delete it, activity records, sign-in and user setup, where data is handled, other companies that process data, past incidents, and what your team must manage.
Review before rollout: confirm how to export your data, revoke access, and return to your existing workflow. Assign an owner and test the rollback plan before expanding use.
Do not approve a pilot yet. Verify the current product identity, package, availability, owner, pricing, and security evidence; then define one workflow, a baseline, and rollback criteria.
A security tool that inventories every AI model, prompt, and dataset a company uses and flags risky or unapproved ones.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with Mend AIAn AI coding agent built into Jira and Bitbucket that plans, writes, and reviews code using ticket and repository context.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with Atlassian Rovo DevA software delivery platform that bundles AI agents for coding, security testing, deployment risk, and cloud cost into one DevOps system.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with Harness AIAn AI assistant built into the GitLab software platform that suggests code, answers questions about a repository, and summarizes changes.
Why it’s an alternative—
Compare with GitLab DuoWhere to check the product, price, security, and support.
Research observations recorded: 1. Evidence quality: Some support.
Recorded score and category rank across research updates.
Answer a few questions about your company and compare this tool with others. The research score above stays the same.
Want help moving from research to action? Explore TriVista’s AI consulting services →