Product management infrastructure for your team and your agents.
Dodger studies your market and your users, writes the specs, hands your agents the full context, watches what ships, and takes the next action once you approve it.
A demo of Dodger's workspace: a request built from cited evidence is sent, Dodger drafts a PRD in Documents, the change ships as a pull request, and the release is scored against its goal.
Growth sync · Jul 14
The layer your tools are missing.
Companies have systems for code, tickets, documents, and analytics. Dodger's agents do the product management work that connects them. Here is one loop, closing on an issue nobody had connected.
Dodger's agents watch every ticket, metric, meeting, and commit as it happens.
Every person and every agent can call it.
The same product state answers in Slack, speaks in meetings, gives Claude Code, Cursor, and Codex their context over MCP, and sits behind an API your own software can build on.
The whole company can just ask.
Add Dodger to a channel and any function can ask about the product: what changed, what's known, whether behavior is intentional. Answers carry their sources, scoped to what the asker is allowed to see.
Channels
Apps
48
Jordan Reyes9:41 AM
A customer at Fairbrook says their invite emails never arrive for Outlook users. Is this a known issue?@Dodger
DodgerAPP9:41 AM
Known, and already fixed. Invites to Microsoft domains started failing DMARC checks after PR 191 changed the email sending domain. The fix merged in PR 218 six days ago, and invite acceptance is back above its 70% target.
Finding F-31 · Invite delivery
8 sources cited · High confidence
14 tickets
Acceptance funnelPR 191 · PR 218Jordan Reyes9:42 AM
Perfect, telling Fairbrook now.
Message #support
It sits in your meetings.
Dodger joins the call, answers out loud from the product's evidence, and captures what was decided. An approval given in the room becomes an approved action.
M. Chen · 32:14
"Dodger, how many invites failed while this was broken?"
DodgerSpeaking · 32:19
"240 over the last 30 days. Resending them is drafted as an action, and it needs your approval."
M. Chen · 32:31
"Approved. Only the last 30 days."
Your own software can call it too.
Everything Dodger knows sits behind one API. Your software can send evidence in, ask a question and get an answer with its sources, and listen for the moment something changes.
Recent calls
POST /v1/ask · "Why did invite acceptance recover?"
Your coding agents get the whole product.
An agent that only sees code has to guess at everything else. Before Cursor or Claude Code writes a line, Dodger hands it what your company knows about the task: why it exists, what was decided, and how the feature is doing with real users right now. When the work comes back, Dodger checks it against those same requirements.
Today
Dana WhitfieldProWorked for 4m 02s
Add follow up for the agent
12const dkim = {
13- domain: "acme.com",
13+ domain: "mail.acme.com",
14+ selector: "invites",
1+ it("aligns DKIM with From", () => {
2+ const msg = buildInvite(user)
3+ expect(alignment(msg)).toBe("pass")
1+ "dkim-align": {
2+ "version": "3.2.1",
✻Claude Code · acme/notify-service
> Resend the invites that failed during the outage. Approved scope only.
⏺ dodger · get_task_context (MCP)
⎿ Approved by M. Chen · last 30 days only
⏺ Bash(bun invites:resend --dry-run)
⎿ 240 matched · 0 outside the approved window
⏺ Bash(bun invites:resend --since 30d)
⎿ Queued 240 through the realigned sender
⏺ 240 invites requeued. Acceptance is tracked against the 70% target in F-31.
? for shortcuts
It takes action. You stay in control.
Every answer shows the sources it came from. Every person and agent sees only what their role allows. And every action Dodger proposes waits for a person to approve it.
Resend 240 failed invites
Approved by M. Chen · scope: last 30 days
Ran, watched, and back above its 70% goal
"I paste quotes into a spreadsheet…"#4821 · "See two quotes at once?"214 sessions switching tabsEvery decision cites its sources.
Ask why a feature exists and Dodger shows the interviews, tickets, and numbers behind it.
Support5 sourcesFinance8 sourcesPeople see only what they're allowed to.
The same question gets a different answer per role, built from only the sources that role can open.
The record stays with the work.
Who approved what, and when, travels with the work from the PRD to the pull request.
FAQ.
The short answers. For anything else, book a demo and ask us directly.