Agentic Labs

What do they actually do

Agentic Labs builds Glide, a web app that helps software teams triage issues, draft technical design docs, and propose concrete code changes. Teams connect a GitHub repository (or try a public repo as a guest), describe a task or link an issue, and Glide searches the codebase to produce a triage summary, step‑by‑step plan, and suggested edits or PR content. It also offers a context‑aware chat assistant and an export flow to editors like VS Code; the team says automatic PR creation is coming soon Glide site YC profile.

The product is aimed at teams with 10+ engineers who want to speed up planning and implementation for non‑trivial code work. Glide requests GitHub access to tailor outputs, says it only accesses repos when you work on them, and states it does not store your code; access can be revoked at any time Glide site. The company appears to be in public beta with early pilots and testimonials shared, consistent with a small, hands‑on B2B rollout LinkedIn post.

Who are their target customer(s)

• Engineering managers / heads of engineering at teams with 10+ engineers: Prioritization and triage take too long, and delegating work is slowed by unclear scope and design. They need faster, predictable planning from the actual codebase to keep delivery on schedule YC profile Glide site.
• Tech leads and senior engineers driving non‑trivial changes: They lose time reading scattered code and drafting implementation plans and PRs. They want repo‑aware triage, stepwise plans, and concrete edits they can review and export to their editor Glide site.
• Mid‑level ICs responsible for design docs and PRs: Producing clear design notes and correct code changes is slow without an authoritative view of code and related tickets. They want help generating alternatives and suggested edits to reduce manual drafting Glide site.
• New hires or engineers onboarding to a complex codebase: Becoming productive is slow because context is split across code, docs, and tickets. They need a single place that organizes code + product + ticket context for quicker understanding Agentic homepage.
• Product managers / engineering program managers coordinating cross‑team work: Planning is unreliable when technical options and effort are vague. They need clear tradeoffs, timelines, and scoped implementation plans surfaced from the codebase Glide site.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Run tightly scoped, hands‑on pilots with 10+‑engineer teams via YC/founder intros and outbound to engineering managers; offer free/discounted 4–6 week pilots that connect to a repo and deliver triage + step‑by‑step plans, using testimonials to reduce friction Glide site YC profile LinkedIn.
• First 50: Convert pilots into references and add low‑friction trials: publish short case studies and recorded demos (including “send to VSCode”), run weekly office hours for eng leads, and open a self‑serve trial for public repos; use pilot customers as referrers and charge a modest paid‑pilot fee for new enterprise prospects Glide site YC profile.
• First 100: Formalize a simple sales motion and channels: hire 1–2 reps to target SMB/mid‑market eng managers with a standardized paid‑pilot package and clear evaluation metrics (time saved on triage/PRs), while building partnerships with eng consultancies and co‑hosted workshops; tie the pitch to the roadmap (context engine, connectors, evaluation tooling) Agentic homepage Glide site.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

Glide sits within the AI code/developer tools market, which some analysts size at roughly USD ~4.9B in 2023 with rapid growth expected, and adjacent to the broader software development tools market estimated in the low single‑digit billions; if their roadmap expands into a context/agent platform, the long‑run ceiling aligns with the larger AI software market (tens to low hundreds of billions) Grand View Research Cognitive Market Research ABI Research.

Bottom-up calculation:

Using a developer base of ~27M globally, if ~30% work in orgs with 10+ engineers (≈8.1M devs) and the average team size is 20, that’s ~405k teams; assuming 15 paid seats per team at $50/user/month implies a full‑penetration ARR TAM of roughly $3.6B, with 10% penetration around $360M Evans Data.

Assumptions:

• 27M developers worldwide (Evans Data, 2024) Evans Data.
• 30% of developers are in 10+‑engineer orgs; average team size = 20; average paid seats per team using Glide = 15.
• Pricing assumption = $50 per user per month (illustrative; actual pricing not published).

Who are some of their notable competitors

• GitHub Copilot: Widely adopted AI pair‑programmer integrated into editors and GitHub; assists with code generation and repo‑aware chat, overlapping with Glide’s assistive planning and coding surface.
• Sourcegraph Cody: Context‑aware AI code assistant with codebase search, chat, and change suggestions for teams; directly competes on understanding large repos and proposing edits.
• Cursor: An AI‑first code editor that uses repo context for chat and refactors; overlaps with Glide’s goal of reasoning over code and generating changes.
• Codeium: AI coding suite (autocomplete, chat, refactor) for teams with enterprise features; competes for developer seats seeking repo‑aware assistance.
• Sweep AI: Tooling focused on turning issues into code changes/PRs with AI; close to Glide’s workflow of triage-to-change proposals for engineering teams.