Home How It Works Skills Skills Catalog Capabilities Roadmap Changelog FAQ Pricing
Pricing

We're working on this.
Honestly.

Scaffold OS pricing is still being figured out — and we'd rather be transparent about that than show you a number we're not confident in yet. Here's our thinking, the models we're exploring, and how you can influence it.

🛠️ In active brainstorming — your input genuinely shapes this

We're in early access specifically because we want to work through pricing with real users before locking it in. If you have a perspective on what the right model looks like — especially if you've dealt with frustrating pricing on other AI tools — read the FAQ. Early access teams who give useful input on pricing will be rewarded with preferred pricing locked in for 12 months.

Our Pricing Principles

What we believe pricing should do.

Before picking a model, we've defined what we want it to achieve. These principles are non-negotiable — any model we go with has to satisfy all of them.

⚖️
Value-aligned cost
You should pay more when you're getting more value — larger projects, more complex builds, more external systems. Not based on arbitrary seat counts.
🔍
Predictable bills
You should be able to estimate your monthly cost before starting a project. No surprise charges because a session ran longer than expected.
🚀
Low barrier to start
You should be able to actually experience the value before committing significant budget. The first project should be low-risk to try.
📈
Scales with output
A solo developer shipping one SaaS per quarter and a team shipping four complex systems per month should pay proportionally different amounts.
🔄
No lock-in penalties
Pricing should never feel like a trap. If the product stops serving you, leaving should be easy — contractually and financially.
💬
Honest communication
When pricing changes — and it will as the product evolves — existing users will get 60 days notice and be given options. No surprise increases.
Angles We're Exploring

Three models. All have merit.

We're not committed to any of these yet. Each has genuine advantages and genuine open questions. We'd love your perspective on which resonates.

1
Project-based credits
Pay per build session or per build phase completed
Exploring
You buy a pack of build credits. Each session consumes credits based on complexity — a brainstorm + audit session costs fewer credits than a full multi-system build phase. This directly aligns what you pay with what you're getting, and lets you start small and scale up naturally.
Directly tied to value received — big builds cost more, small ones cost less
No monthly subscription feeling when you're between projects
Hard to estimate exactly how many credits a complex project will use before starting
Credits might discourage experimentation if you're unsure of the cost
2
Monthly tier subscription
Fixed monthly fee with capability and session limits per tier
Considering
Standard SaaS tiering: Individual builder, Professional, Team. Each tier unlocks more build surfaces, more concurrent sessions, more external platform connections. Simple to understand, predictable to budget.
Predictable monthly cost — easy to budget and plan
Encourages usage — you're paying whether you use it or not, so you use it
Feels arbitrary if you have one big project one month and nothing the next
Hard to tier "correctly" — wrong limits frustrate power users, right limits undersell to casual users
3
Hybrid: base access + consumption
Low monthly base for access, usage-based component for build activity
Leaning Toward
A small monthly access fee that covers the protocol, planning tools, and state management. Then a usage component that scales with actual build activity — sessions run, external platforms connected, parallel agents deployed. Aligns cost with value while keeping the base predictable.
Balances predictability (fixed base) with fair scaling (usage component)
Low base means low commitment; heavy users pay proportionally more
More complex to communicate — two-part pricing is harder to explain simply
Usage component still needs careful calibration to avoid bill anxiety
What We've Decided

Things that are settled regardless of model.

✓ Early access teams get preferred pricing. Whatever the public pricing ends up being, early access users lock in a lower rate for a minimum of 12 months. The earlier you join, the better the terms.
✓ There will be a way to try before committing. Whether that's a free project, a limited trial, or a money-back period — you'll be able to validate that Scaffold OS actually works for your use case before significant spend.
✓ Pricing changes come with 60 days notice. We've seen too many SaaS products raise prices overnight. That won't happen here.
✓ No annual contract requirement to get good pricing. Month-to-month at a reasonable price. Annual discounts for those who want them — not as a trap to get a good rate.

Your input actually changes this page.

If you have a strong opinion on any of the three angles above — or a pricing model you've seen work well in a tool you use — tell us. Early access users who give substantial input on pricing structure will be the first to know when pricing is finalized, and will get preferred terms as a thank-you.

See the Roadmap →