AI Coding Accountability

Your AI coding bill doubled.

You can't tell finance why.

Cursor. Claude Code. Copilot. Same developer, same sprint — three invoices, zero chargeback. Codensics gives finance the number they're asking for — by team, by release, by tool.

Works with

Claude Code

Cursor

GitHub Copilot

Codex / GPT-4o

Any Git Workflow

108%

YoY jump in enterprise AI spend

Average $1.2M per org — 78% hit unbudgeted charges

31%

of AI spend attributable to outcomes

The other 69% is a number with no team, release, or ROI behind it

36%

track spend without measuring ROI

Or don't measure ROI at all — AI coding is now a top-3 software line item

Uber

Apr 2026

Uber exhausted its entire planned 2026 AI budget months into the year after a surge in Claude Code usage. CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga said the company is "back to the drawing board" — despite $3.4B in R&D spend.

The Information · April 2026 · This is the operational reality for every engineering org running AI coding tools at scale

How it works

One record from prompt to spend

Codensics sits inside your IDE and CI pipeline — capturing exactly what each AI tool generated, who accepted it, and what it cost. Per team. Per release. In one view.

Prompt

Model + Response

Accepted Code

Commit + Author

Release / PR

Spend → Team

✓

Finance-grade chargeback

Break AI spend by team, repo, and release. CFO gets a real number mapped to real output.

✓

Cross-tool in one view

Cursor + Claude Code + Copilot in a single record. One developer, one sprint — not three dashboards.

✓

Agent vs. human attribution

Know exactly which lines were AI-generated, by which model, accepted by which developer. Built-in for any post-incident review.

Start here

Your CFO is asking.
We'll show you the answer.

We run attribution on one team's repo — live, on your data. 15 minutes to see exactly what your AI coding bill bought.