IMerge · repository + workflow consequence prediction

See what a code change may affect before it merges.

Analyze a public pull request or upload your own change to estimate blast radius, relevant tests, engineering risk, workflow delays, and the safest next action.

Your code is analyzed as text and metadata. It is never executed.Temporary workspaces are removed automatically after each request. Dependencies, hooks, scripts, filters, and containers are never run.

Or explore the guided example →
No account required · submitted code is never executedExplore prepared example How it works ↓
One analysis, five decisions

Move from changed lines to engineering consequences.

Each prediction includes confidence and the evidence that produced it.

01

Impact

Trace the modules and dependency paths a change could reach.

02

Tests

Select high-signal checks and show the safety trade-off.

03

Risk

Score technical and workflow risk with visible evidence.

04

Time-to-green

Estimate feedback time, reruns, review delay, and bottlenecks.

05

Next action

Compare interventions and identify the safest practical move.

How it works

A consequence model grounded in the repository.

01

Map the system

Combine module dependencies, ownership, tests, CI history, and workflow events.

02

Apply the PR

Treat changed files as an intervention and traverse likely technical and delivery effects.

03

Compare actions

Simulate targeted tests, full CI, reviewer changes, splitting, reruns, or no intervention.

Built for

Teams responsible for safe, fast delivery.

Platform teamsMake test and workflow policy evidence-driven.

Engineering leadsSee cross-team consequences before review stalls.

Teams with expensive CIReduce feedback cost without hiding residual risk.

Prepared demo

The interactive experience uses a fictional commerce repository and synthetic workflow history. It is designed to show the product flow—not claim customer outcomes.

Open the demo →