→Navigara · Product·Token Spend Intelligence

Cut the token bill. Keep the output.

Chameleon routes every task to the cheapest model that can do it, and what you spend is priced against graded output. The budget conversation ends with evidence.

Trusted by engineering teams

Kiwi.comFinshapePartners BankaPurple TechnologyGreysonItrinityESETFTMOKeggSecond Foundation
NChameleon · routing, last 24hBeta

1,284 tasks routed · 2 held at frontier

Spend, 30d$124,880
Saved vs frontier-only41%
Quality held98%
  • Scaffold CRUD endpoints

    navigaracom/vision · ENG-2917

    Haiku 4.5
  • Refactor auth middleware

    navigaracom/vision · ENG-2884

    Sonnet 5
  • Payments architecture spike

    navigaracom/billing · ENG-2902

    Opus 5
  • Backfill unit tests

    navigaracom/identity · ENG-2871

    Haiku 4.5
  • Incident root cause, checkout

    navigaracom/vision · INC-441

    Opus 5
01Chameleon · the router

Chameleon picks the model. You teach it what best means.

Most work does not need your most expensive model. Some must never run on anything else. Chameleon reads each task and its blast radius, then routes it to the cheapest model that holds the quality bar.

NChameleon · routing a taskLive
Incoming task

Scaffold CRUD endpoints

navigaracom/vision · ENG-2917

Fully specified1 fileNo prior revertsLow blast radius
Predicted quality on this taskYour quality bar · 85
  • Haiku 4.592$0.02
  • Sonnet 597$0.11
  • Opus 599$0.98
Decision

Haiku 4.5 at $0.02. 98% cheaper than defaulting to the frontier model.

Per-task, not per-seat

The unit of routing is a task with a known shape, not a developer with a licence.

Trainable, not fixed

Every accept, revert and rollback is a label. Your policy diverges from our default on purpose.

Refusal is a feature

Work with real blast radius stays on the frontier model, and the router records why it declined to save money.

The default policy is ours. The one you run is yours.

Every codebase has its own idea of which tasks are dangerous, so the policy is trainable rather than a vendor default.

NChameleon · routing policyNavigara default policy
Where the work goesshare of tasks
Haiku 4.534%Sonnet 541%Opus 525%
Cost ceiling per task$0.42
Latency ceiling8.0s
Caution on blast radiusBalanced
Our default
Pinned to the frontier tierNothing pinned yet. The router decides every task on its own merits.

Decide migrations always run on the frontier model and that becomes policy. The router argues with the bill, never with you.

02Two lenses

A cheaper model on work nobody asked for is cheaper waste.

Two ways to think about AI efficiency: which models you run, and what you spend the tokens on. Chameleon handles the first, and it caps out. Model choice saves a percentage. Work type decides whether the spend should exist.

NAI spend · last 30 days$124,880
By work typeWhat were the tokens for?
Features 51.8%$64,688
Maintenance 22.3%$27,848
11.9%
5.1%
8.9%
Features $64,688Maintenance $27,848Tests $14,861Docs $6,369Fixes $11,114
By roadmap alignmentDid anyone ask for it?
Roadmap aligned 48.6%$60,691
Aligned 22.7%$28,348
Unaligned 28.7%$35,841
Roadmap aligned $60,691· tied to a named objectiveAligned $28,348· justified, off roadmapUnaligned $35,841· no stated outcome
Unaligned · no stated outcome$5,290
03The denominator

A pull request is not a unit of value.

Routing cuts the bill. Whether it cut the output depends on what you divide by. Spend per pull request measures activity, and activity is what inflates when work gets easier to produce. Divide by it and every rollout looks like a win.

NSame spend, two denominatorsAI spend$124,880unchanged
  • ActivityPull requests mergedWhat the rest of the category divides by
    Denominator74210 PRs
    +184% growth
    $1,688$595per pull requestOverstates the gain
  • Graded valueETV, scored per commitA language model reads each diff and grades what it was worth
    Denominator46.675.4 ETV
    +62% growth
    $2,680$1,656per ETVThe honest number

Activity inflates when the work gets cheaper to produce. Graded value does not, so it is the only denominator that survives an AI rollout.

ETV is a per-commit value score: a language model reads each diff and grades it. Scored, not counted.

04Budget defense

Stop defending the bill. Start defending the return.

A budget increase is easy when the price of a unit of shipped work falls while volume rises. Spend breaks down the same way output does, tied to the objectives it moved.

NAI spend · trailing 6 months

Cost per ETV down 38%

Cost per ETV shipped$2680$1656
2680Mar
2481Apr
2179May
1946Jun
1767Jul
1656Aug

Absolute spend rose over the same period. What fell is the price of a unit of graded output, which is the number that settles the argument.

Where it went · 30d$18,240
  • Features$9,48552%
    Shipped against a roadmap objective
  • Maintenance$4,01322%
    Keeping what exists running
  • Tests$2,18912%
    Coverage written alongside the change
  • Docs$9125%
    Runbooks and API reference
  • Fixes$1,6419%
    Bugs, regressions, edge cases
Budget ask

At today’s rate, another $40,000 a quarter buys roughly 165 ETV of additional shipped work.

Follow a dollar from the initiative to the commit.

Spend flows from an initiative down to a commit, and at every link it either still answers to the mandate above it or it does not. The band at the bottom left is the 21% with no issue behind it.

NContext chain · Q2 2026 · $20.5K
Does the spend answer to anything above it?Yes, a roadmap objectiveYes, keeping the lights onUnproven, no stated outcomeNo mandate at all
AI spend traced from initiative to commitInitiativeProjectIssuePull request#2071 table view3.6d · $2.5K · 12%#2071 table view · 3.6d · $2.5K · 12%Drill-down table view3.6d · $2.5K · 12%Drill-down table view · 3.6d · $2.5K · 12%#2074 sankey view1.9d · $1.3K · 6%#2074 sankey view · 1.9d · $1.3K · 6%Sankey flow view1.9d · $1.3K · 6%Sankey flow view · 1.9d · $1.3K · 6%Context Chain UI5.5d · $3.7K · 18%Context Chain UI · 5.5d · $3.7K · 18%#2080 link inference4.4d · $3.0K · 15%#2080 link inference · 4.4d · $3.0K · 15%Infer PR to issue links4.4d · $3.0K · 15%Infer PR to issue links · 4.4d · $3.0K · 15%Context Chain backend4.4d · $3.0K · 15%Context Chain backend · 4.4d · $3.0K · 15%Context Chain9.9d · $6.7K · 33%Context Chain · 9.9d · $6.7K · 33%#2060 spend columns2.9d · $2.0K · 10%#2060 spend columns · 2.9d · $2.0K · 10%#2059 unify primitives4.4d · $3.0K · 14%unproven#2059 unify primitives · 4.4d · $3.0K · 14% · unprovenAI spend / ETV in lists7.3d · $4.9K · 24%AI spend / ETV in lists · 7.3d · $4.9K · 24%AI spend & ETV7.3d · $4.9K · 24%AI spend & ETV · 7.3d · $4.9K · 24%#2062 page-size fix1.1d · $0.8K · 4%#2062 page-size fix · 1.1d · $0.8K · 4%Standardise page size1.1d · $0.8K · 4%Standardise page size · 1.1d · $0.8K · 4%#2055 drop dead code0.9d · $0.6K · 3%#2055 drop dead code · 0.9d · $0.6K · 3%Delete dead dropdown0.9d · $0.6K · 3%Delete dead dropdown · 0.9d · $0.6K · 3%Reports redesign2.0d · $1.4K · 7%unprovenReports redesign · 2.0d · $1.4K · 7% · unprovenMetrics Platform9.3d · $6.3K · 31%Metrics Platform · 9.3d · $6.3K · 31%#2061 select key1.1d · $0.8K · 4%#2061 select key · 1.1d · $0.8K · 4%License verifying key1.1d · $0.8K · 4%License verifying key · 1.1d · $0.8K · 4%#2068 reset marks1.6d · $1.1K · 5%#2068 reset marks · 1.6d · $1.1K · 5%Reaper stale marks1.6d · $1.1K · 5%Reaper stale marks · 1.6d · $1.1K · 5%#2072 stream clones1.9d · $1.2K · 6%#2072 stream clones · 1.9d · $1.2K · 6%Cut collector memory1.9d · $1.2K · 6%unprovenCut collector memory · 1.9d · $1.2K · 6% · unprovenKTLO · security and ops4.6d · $3.1K · 15%KTLO · security and ops · 4.6d · $3.1K · 15%#2065 bump 41 packages0.5d · $0.3K · 2%no mandate#2065 bump 41 packages · 0.5d · $0.3K · 2% · no mandate#2067 split provider2.8d · $1.9K · 9%no mandate#2067 split provider · 2.8d · $1.9K · 9% · no mandate#2069 commit clustering3.3d · $2.1K · 10%unproven#2069 commit clustering · 3.3d · $2.1K · 10% · unprovenNo issue found6.5d · $4.4K · 21%No issue found · 6.5d · $4.4K · 21%

Green clears the mandate above it. Amber is questionable. Red has no mandate behind it. Band width is cost.

Board-ready exports, an audit trail from every dollar to the commits behind it, and per-team breakdowns finance can reconcile.

05AI transformation

Knowing what you spent is not the same as knowing what to fix.

The usual answer is one maturity score that tells nobody what to do on Monday. We score five dimensions from evidence, compare each against your org median, and name the one gap worth closing next.

AI adoption

Five independent levels for how this team works with AI agents. Each level comes from its own evidence, so the levels are never added together.

Jun 8 to Aug 2, 2026Eight complete weeks, excluding this week
Agentfluency4.4Agent fluency: 4.4 of 5, median 3.0Delegationdepth3.9Delegation depth: 3.9 of 5, median 2.1Roadmapalignment3.5Roadmap alignment: 3.5 of 5, median 1.7Contextleverage0.8Context leverage: 0.8 of 5, median 2.3Agenticautonomy0.5Agentic autonomy: 0.5 of 5, median 1.2
This teamOrganization median (n=42)

Ahead of the median on 3 of 5 dimensions. Largest lead: Delegation depth (+1.8). Largest gap: Context leverage (−1.5).

  • Agent fluencyAI-active 7 of 8 weeks
  • Delegation depthDeep delegation on 21 of 28 agent days
  • Roadmap alignment72% of work credited to roadmap objectives
  • Context leverage3 of 12 artifacts state a why and outcome
  • Agentic autonomy2% of work owned end-to-end by agents
Recommended next, context leverage
  • Require a why and an expected outcome on every agent task, not just a title
  • Attach the ticket and the failing test to the prompt so agents stop rediscovering context
  • Promote the three artifacts that already do this into templates for the rest of the team

The levels are never added together. A team that delegates deeply but writes no context has a specific, fixable problem, and an average hides it.

06Monday morning

What this changes.

  • Answer the CFO’s question about the AI line item with a cost per unit of shipped work, not a per-seat count

  • Walk into the budget review knowing what another $40,000 a quarter actually buys

  • Show which teams turn tokens into roadmap work and which turn them into waste

  • Give a team one named thing to improve next quarter, with the evidence behind it

→Start here

See what your tokens
actually bought.

Measurement runs read-only against your repositories, boards and provider bills. Routing is the one place Navigara sits in the request path, and it is opt-in, per team.

Your keys, your providers

Chameleon routes through your own provider accounts. No resale, no markup.

Nothing retained

Prompts and completions are not stored once a routing decision is made.

Every decision logged

The model chosen, the reason, the cost, and the cheaper option it rejected.