Pacia Intelligence

For Developers

Measured, yes. But you can check the number.

You have probably been measured by a tool like this before and it was not a good experience. Pacia does report contribution per person — there is a contributor board, and it ranks. What is different is that every figure on it opens to the actual pull requests, so a number about your work is one you can inspect and argue with rather than one handed down.

Talk to us
My Day
Waiting on your review
3 pull requests
Your PRs waiting on others
2 pull requests
Failing checks on your branches
1
Assigned issues in this sprint
4
Your contributor view
The same figures your manager sees

The objection to this category is legitimate. Hiding the numbers is not the fix.

Developer analytics earned its reputation honestly. A generation of tools shipped contributor scores and "productivity" rankings that were trivially gamed, impossible to interrogate, and routinely used in performance conversations they were never validated for. Scepticism is the correct starting position.

What made those tools bad was not that they counted things. It was that the count was a black box — a score appeared, nobody could see what fed it, and disagreeing with it made you sound defensive. Pacia counts things too, and then shows its working: open any rank, total or percentage and you get the specific pull requests it came from, over the date range you chose.

That changes who holds the evidence. If a figure misrepresents your quarter — a long stretch of review work, or a migration that was three commits and six weeks — the drill-down is what lets you show that rather than assert it. The same applies to the arguments most worth winning: review pickup time and reviewer concentration are invisible until somebody plots them, and once plotted they normally argue in favour of protecting your review time.

Open the number before anyone interprets it

The same period, underlying value and pull requests are visible to the developer and the manager. Context is part of the workflow, not a footnote added afterwards.

A contributor number is the start of the conversation

  1. 1Select the questionMetric, team and date range
  2. 2See position + trendUnderlying value and share of team
  3. 3Open the evidenceThe exact pull requests behind the figure
  4. 4Add contextReview load, flow and the work itself

No rank is presented as a verdict. The person and the manager can open the same evidence, over the same period, before using it in a review.

What is actually in it for you

  • One queue instead of six tabs

    My Day collects what is waiting on your review, what of yours is waiting on others, failing checks on your branches and your assigned issues. It is the fastest honest answer to "what should I pick up".

  • Delivery context inside your editor

    Pacia exposes its analytics over MCP, so VS Code, JetBrains, Claude Code and Cursor can answer questions about sprint state, epic progress or a pull request without you leaving the editor. Access is scoped to your organisation by your own token.

  • Evidence for the review-time argument

    Reviewer concentration and pickup time, plotted. If two people are carrying seventy per cent of reviews, that is now a chart rather than a feeling, and it usually changes how the work is spread.

  • Targets your team chose

    Working agreements are set per team. If a four-hour review target is unrealistic for your team, the fix is to change the number in a retro, and the compliance view is the evidence for doing so.

  • No surprises in a one-to-one

    Contributor Insights shows you your own figures and trend — the same view, from the same data, that your manager opens. Walking into a review already knowing what the numbers say, and where they are misleading, is a considerably better position than finding out in the room.

Where this lives in Pacia

Common questions

Can my manager see my individual metrics?

Yes — contribution is reported per person, and there is a ranked contributor board. You can see exactly the same figures for yourself in Contributor Insights, and every one of them opens to the pull requests it was computed from. Access is scoped by role: members see their own teams, owners and admins see the organisation.

Does Pacia read our source code?

It reads pull request metadata — titles, reviews, timings, sizes, checks — not file contents for analysis. The GitHub App asks for Pull requests (read), Metadata (read) and Members (read). Access tokens for other providers are AES-256-GCM encrypted at rest and never returned by any API response.

What is the MCP server?

A standard Model Context Protocol endpoint that lets an AI-enabled editor query Pacia’s delivery analytics. Every tool it exposes calls the same service the equivalent page calls, so an answer in your editor matches the answer on screen. Your organisation comes from your token — a model cannot ask about someone else’s data.

Do I count towards the bill?

If you author or review code, yes — £20 per month equivalent on the annual contract. That is the whole developer charge; there is no per-feature upsell.

See it against your own delivery data

Connect one repository and judge it on your own history rather than a demo dataset. Guided onboarding is included on every paid plan.

Talk to us