toolcurrent
Navigation

Explore

Cody logo

Cody

EnterpriseDevelopment Last updated: April 10, 2026

Sourcegraph's enterprise AI coding assistant using Sourcegraph's code intelligence platform for cross-repository codebase context at scale.

Our General Score

7.2/10
Functionality8.0
Features7.5
Usability7.0
Value5.5
Integrations7.5
Reliability7.5

Plans & Pricing

Use Cases

Coding

8.0

Cross-repository semantic context retrieval enables AI suggestions that account for architecture and dependencies across an entire engineering organization's codebase — unavailable in single-repository tools.

Research

7.5

Sourcegraph code search combined with Cody's AI explanations accelerates onboarding and codebase exploration for large, unfamiliar repositories at enterprise scale.

Platforms

DesktopWebAPI

Capabilities

Context WindowN/A
API PricingN/A
Image Generation✗ No
Memory Persistence◑ Partial
Computer Use✗ No
API Available✗ No
Multimodal✗ No
Open Source✗ No
Browser Extension✗ No

Overview

Cody is Sourcegraph's AI coding assistant built on Sourcegraph's code intelligence infrastructure, which indexes billions of lines of code and uses semantic search to retrieve relevant context from across entire codebases — including multiple repositories simultaneously. In July 2025, Sourcegraph discontinued Cody Free and Cody Pro for new signups, making Cody an enterprise-only product. Cody Enterprise ($59/user/month, annual contract) provides full Sourcegraph platform access including code search, AI chat, autocomplete, and single-tenant deployment. The Amp product is Sourcegraph's newer agentic development tool targeting individual developers. Primary limitation: the removal of individual plans eliminates Cody as an option for solo developers and small teams — it is now exclusively for large enterprise engineering organizations.

Key Features

  • Cross-repository context retrieval: Sourcegraph's code intelligence indexes all organizational repositories and uses semantic search to retrieve relevant context from anywhere in the codebase
  • Flexible LLM selection: users can choose between multiple supported language models for Cody chat, enabling teams to standardize on their preferred model
  • Single-tenant deployment: Cody Enterprise runs in the customer's cloud infrastructure, not on shared Sourcegraph servers, meeting data isolation requirements
  • Full Sourcegraph platform access: code search, batch changes, code insights, and AI assistance in a single enterprise contract
  • SAML SSO and enterprise access controls: full identity and access management integration for large engineering organizations

Pros & Cons

Pros

  • Cross-repository semantic context retrieval is a capability no other mainstream AI coding tool provides at equivalent scale — critical for large monorepo or multi-service organizations
  • Flexible LLM selection lets enterprise teams standardize on their preferred model or switch models as the market evolves without changing tooling
  • Single-tenant deployment provides data isolation without requiring full on-premises infrastructure, balancing compliance and operational overhead
  • Full Sourcegraph platform (code search + AI) in one contract eliminates the need for separate code search and AI assistance subscriptions

Cons

  • Enterprise-only since July 2025 — individual developers and small teams have no access option at any price point below enterprise contract
  • $59/user/month with annual contract required is 6x the cost of GitHub Copilot Pro for individual developers; justification requires genuine multi-repository scale
  • Discontinuation of Free and Pro plans removed a key evaluation path — teams must commit to enterprise discussions before testing Cody at meaningful scale
  • Amp is Sourcegraph's newer agentic product for individual developers, creating potential confusion about Cody's roadmap position within the Sourcegraph portfolio

Who It's For

Best For

  • Large enterprise engineering organizations with multiple repositories who need AI assistance that understands cross-repo dependencies and architecture
  • Platform engineering teams who need AI-assisted code search, onboarding acceleration, and codebase exploration across 50+ repositories
  • Organizations already using Sourcegraph Code Search who want to add AI assistance under an existing vendor relationship
  • Security and compliance teams in regulated industries who require single-tenant deployment and full data isolation for AI coding assistance

Not Ideal For

  • Individual developers and small teams — Cody has no plan available below enterprise pricing since July 2025; GitHub Copilot Pro at $10/month or Cursor Pro at $20/month serve this market
  • Organizations evaluating AI coding tools without a confirmed enterprise budget — no self-service trial or free tier exists for evaluation
  • Teams whose codebase fits within a single repository — the multi-repository context advantage does not apply, and cheaper tools provide equivalent single-repo assistance
  • Companies looking for browser-based app generation or agentic IDE features — Cody is an AI assistant for existing developers, not an app builder

Audience Scores

Cross-repository context retrieval at scale is Cody's core differentiator — Sourcegraph's code intelligence infrastructure indexes all repositories in an organization, enabling AI assistance that understands full architectural dependencies.

Enterprise-only access at $59/user/month with annual commitment makes Cody inaccessible for individual developers and small teams; GitHub Copilot, Cursor, or Windsurf provide better value for non-enterprise use.

Consider These Instead

When Not To Choose Cody

Choose GitHub Copilot Enterprise ($39/user/month) if your organization needs enterprise AI coding assistance with GitHub.com integration, codebase fine-tuning, and IP indemnity at a lower price point than Cody. Choose Tabnine Enterprise ($39–59/user/month) if air-gapped or on-premises deployment is required alongside enterprise AI coding assistance.

Integrations

Vs CodeJetbrains IdesGithubGitlabBitbucketPerforceSlack (Via Sourcegraph)

Known Limitations

pricing complexityecosystem weaknessfeature gap