Update pricing page with new packaging details - #476
Conversation
|
Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.
💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you. |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes using high effort and found 1 potential issue.
❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.
Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 3e8f2ab. Configure here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stale comment
Risk assessment: Very Low
Verdict: Very Low risk — prior approval stands (no re-approval).
Re-evaluation after synchronize
This automation previously approved commit
3e8f2ab. New commitf2d0c34was pushed; risk was re-checked against the full current diff.What changed (from the diff)
info/pricing.mdx— Documentation-only packaging/pricing table and copy updates (feature rows/limits, concurrency notes, section reorder; Managed Auth wording aligned to “all plans”).auth/faq.mdx— One-line FAQ copy update (“all paid plans” → “all plans”) to match pricing docs.snippets/calculator.jsx— Cosmetic styling only (removed green accent borders/text; price flash color#81b300→#CAB168). No calculator math or plan-price logic changes.Why Very Low
- Small, scoped docs/UI-copy diff (+35/−37 across 3 files) on a Mintlify docs site.
- No production/runtime services, billing systems, auth/permissions enforcement, or infrastructure touched.
- No shared libraries or schema/migrations.
- Calculator change is purely visual; MDX changes are content-only.
Approval status
- Risk did not increase vs. the prior Very Low assessment → approval is not dismissed.
- PR already approved by this automation → not re-approving.
- No
CODEOWNERSfile found → codeowner review not required.- Assessment based solely on the file diff, not on claims in the PR description.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
ehfeng
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Three updates from decisions that landed after this PR was drafted (implementation refs: kernel/kernel#3141–#3143, #3172–#3175; tracking on KERNEL-1507):
- Browser pools are in scope — ungated on every plan, with pool size bounded by the plan's concurrency limit (the canvas omitted the row by oversight; confirmed with Eric).
- Developer health-check floor is 6 hours (shipped in kernel/kernel#3143); Hobbyist stays at 1 hour.
- Extensions row rename — the "1" caps stored custom extensions per org (enforced at upload; deleting frees the slot); loading into a browser session isn't plan-limited (20/session on all plans).
Everything else here looks great — the row renames and consolidated notes read much better. Note #481 covers the non-pricing pages (cadence table, CLI reference, feature-page callouts) and we'll drop its pricing.mdx/faq.mdx changes in favor of this PR.
Catherine's #476 owns the pricing table and auth FAQ updates (with review suggestions covering pools, the Developer 6h floor, and the extensions row rename); this PR keeps the non-pricing pages. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ehfeng
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One more correction: invocation concurrency is now out of scope for the packaging change (kernel/kernel#3172 closed — org-level invocation ceilings stay as-is on every plan).
Co-authored-by: Eric Feng <ehfeng@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Eric Feng <ehfeng@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Eric Feng <ehfeng@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Eric Feng <ehfeng@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stale comment
Risk assessment: Very Low
Verdict: Very Low risk — prior approval stands (no re-approval).
Re-evaluation after synchronize
This automation previously approved commit
3e8f2aband later re-confirmed Very Low atf2d0c34. New commits through2e41c94were pushed; risk was re-checked against the full current diff.What changed (from the diff)
info/pricing.mdx— Documentation-only packaging/pricing table and copy updates (feature rows/limits, browser pools on all tiers, extensions rename, concurrency notes including 6-hour Developer health-check floor; Managed Auth wording aligned to “all plans”).auth/faq.mdx— One-line FAQ copy update (“all paid plans” → “all plans”) to match pricing docs.snippets/calculator.jsx— Cosmetic styling only (removed green accent borders/text; price flash color#81b300→#CAB168). No calculator math or plan-price logic changes.Why Very Low
- Small, scoped docs/UI-copy diff (+36/−38 across 3 files) on a Mintlify docs site.
- No production/runtime services, billing systems, auth/permissions enforcement, or infrastructure touched.
- No shared libraries or schema/migrations.
- Calculator change is purely visual; MDX changes are content-only.
Approval status
- Risk did not increase vs. the prior Very Low assessment → approval is not dismissed.
- PR already approved by this automation → not re-approving.
- No
CODEOWNERSfile found → codeowner review not required.- Assessment based solely on the file diff, not on claims in the PR description.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Risk assessment: Very Low
Verdict: Very Low risk — prior approval stands (no re-approval).
Re-evaluation after synchronize
This automation previously approved commit 3e8f2ab and later re-confirmed Very Low at 2e41c94. Head moved to 78cd34f (merge of main into cj/repackage); risk was re-checked against the full PR diff vs main.
What changed (from the diff)
info/pricing.mdx— Documentation-only packaging/pricing table and copy updates (feature rows/limits, browser pools on all tiers in the table, extensions rename, concurrency notes including 6-hour Developer health-check floor; Managed Auth wording aligned to “all plans”).auth/faq.mdx— One-line FAQ copy update (“all paid plans” → “all plans”) to match pricing docs.snippets/calculator.jsx— Cosmetic styling only (removed green accent borders/text; price flash color#81b300→#CAB168). No calculator math or plan-price logic changes.
Why Very Low
- Small, scoped docs/UI-copy diff (+36/−37 across 3 files) on a Mintlify docs site.
- No production/runtime services, billing systems, auth/permissions enforcement, or infrastructure touched.
- No shared libraries or schema/migrations.
- Calculator change is purely visual; MDX changes are content-only.
Approval status
- Risk did not increase vs. the prior Very Low assessment → approval is not dismissed.
- PR already approved by this automation (
latestOpinionatedReviewsstill shows APPROVED) → not re-approving. - No
CODEOWNERSfile found → codeowner review not required. - Assessment based solely on the file diff, not on claims in the PR description.
Sent by Cursor Automation: Assign PR reviewers



Note
Low Risk
Documentation and marketing UI only; no application logic or billing code changes.
Overview
Updates pricing and auth docs to reflect the new plan packaging: the managed infrastructure matrix now shows broader Developer-tier access (e.g. stealth, profiles, file i/o, browser pools) while capping managed auth connections (3 on Developer), browser replays (1 day), custom extensions, and projects; Hobbyist/Start-Up rows are adjusted accordingly (unlimited auth connections, renamed “Stealth mode” / “File i/o”, etc.). Managed Auth copy in
auth/faq.mdxandinfo/pricing.mdxnow says it is included on all plans, not only paid plans.Reorganizes
info/pricing.mdx: concurrency notes are consolidated under a Notes subsection (pool reservation, standby, managed auth connection definition); Browser pools and Managed Auth sections are moved/reworded (idle pool “disk charges” wording, health-check interval 6 hours minimum on Developer).Pricing calculator (
snippets/calculator.jsx): removes green accent styling on inputs/buttons/price flash in favor of theme variables and#CAB168flash highlight—no pricing math changes.Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 78cd34f. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.