Engineering intelligence for teams that run on Jira

Your best engineers carry context that doesn’t survive a Jira ticket.

Jira tracks what was built. Mayetik captures why.

Mayetik turns structured engineering conversations into a searchable knowledge base — retrospectives, post-mortems, technical discovery, architecture decisions, onboarding debriefs — so the reasoning behind your work compounds instead of leaving when the engineer does.

Used forSprint retrospectivesIncident post-mortemsTechnical discoveryArchitecture decisionsOnboarding debriefsCross-team alignment

Recommended first session

Run your next retrospective as a structured Mayetik session

The easiest way to feel Mayetik is to run one focused session, generate the brief, then ask what it revealed.

Share with

Your engineering team — the people who just ran the sprint

Time

20 minutes

Expected output

A searchable brief capturing what slowed the team, what worked, and whether last sprint's action items changed anything

The context behind your architecture isn’t in the codebase.

Software teams generate enormous amounts of hard-won knowledge. Why this service uses this database. Why that API contract is shaped the way it is. What the last three incidents had in common. What the new engineers keep getting wrong in their first month.

None of it is in Jira. Some of it is in Confluence — but buried in documents nobody reads. Most of it is in the heads of your senior engineers. When they leave, it goes with them.

Mayetik gives you a structured way to capture that knowledge — as conversations, not documents — and make it searchable before the people who hold it move on.

Where engineering knowledge goes to die:

The retro where the team identified the real bottleneck — and the action item got closed without anyone checking whether the bottleneck moved

The post-mortem where the on-call engineer explained the actual root cause — and the Confluence page captured the timeline instead

The architecture review where three options were debated — and six months later nobody remembers why the third option was ruled out

The discovery session where a stakeholder mentioned a constraint that would have changed the design — mentioned once, never documented, discovered in review

The onboarding week where the new engineer figured out the deployment process by asking around — and updated nothing so the next engineer could repeat the experience

The cross-team sync where two teams realized they had incompatible assumptions about an API — after both had written code against their version

How it works

No research ops overhead. A session takes 20 minutes. The brief is ready when it ends.

1

Run a structured session

Describe what you want to capture — retro, post-mortem, discovery — and Session Studio designs the questions. Or start from a template. Share a link. Engineers respond in a browser tab, no account needed. Voice input available for those who prefer to talk.

2

Get a brief automatically

Every completed session generates an AI knowledge brief — a structured summary of what was said, the key themes, and the most important things to know. No manual synthesis. The engineer's reasoning is captured in their own words.

3

Ask questions across all sessions

Ask plain-language questions across all your briefs and get sourced answers. 'What were the contributing factors in incidents this quarter?' 'What do new engineers consistently find undocumented?' The knowledge is there — now you can find it.

Six ways software teams use Mayetik

From sprint retros to incident post-mortems — the knowledge problems every engineering team runs into.

Sprint Retrospectives

We do retros. We write action items. They go into Jira. Three sprints later nobody remembers why we changed the process — or whether it worked.

Run a structured retrospective session after every sprint. Each brief captures what slowed the team down, what worked that should be repeated, and the team's honest read on whether last sprint's actions made a difference. After a quarter of sessions, synthesize. You will see what's actually improving versus what's generating ritual without progress.

  • Structured retro that produces a searchable brief, not a sticky-note archive
  • Brief captures the reasoning behind each action item — not just the item
  • Synthesize across a quarter to see whether retros are producing real change
Show 5 more ways

Incident Post-mortems

We write post-mortems after every major incident. They sit in Confluence. The next incident is usually something we've seen before in a different form.

Run a structured post-mortem session with the team that responded to the incident. Each brief captures the timeline, the contributing factors, the detection gap, and the action items — with the team's reasoning about what actually caused it, not just the proximate trigger. After several incidents, synthesize. Patterns emerge that individual post-mortems cannot show.

  • Post-mortem brief captures contributing factors and reasoning, not just timeline
  • Action items linked to the systemic patterns behind the incident
  • Synthesis across incidents reveals whether your reliability work is addressing root causes

Technical Discovery

We build the feature. Halfway through, someone raises a constraint that the requirements never captured. We ship something close — and spend the next two sprints fixing the gap.

Run a structured discovery session with stakeholders before writing a single line of code. Each brief captures the real requirements, the hidden constraints, the definition of done that the stakeholder actually has in their head, and the edge cases they forgot to mention. Engineers start with the full picture instead of discovering it mid-build.

  • Constraints and requirements captured before build starts — not during code review
  • Stakeholder's real definition of done, not the one in the ticket
  • Discovery briefs searchable across all past sessions — similar problems surface similar patterns

Architecture Decision Records

The senior engineer who made the call has left. Nobody knows why we picked this approach. We're about to repeat the same design discussion and probably make the same tradeoffs.

Run a structured session with the engineers who made each major architectural decision — before they leave, or while the reasoning is still fresh. Each brief captures the options considered, the constraints that drove the choice, the tradeoffs accepted, and the conditions under which the decision should be revisited. The reasoning survives the person.

  • Decision reasoning captured — not just the decision itself
  • Tradeoffs and constraints documented in the engineer's own words
  • Search across all past decisions to find why something was built the way it was

Onboarding Debriefs

Every new engineer hits the same three undocumented things. We fix it for them individually. The fourth engineer hits it too. Our docs never improve.

Run a structured onboarding debrief with every new engineer at the end of their first month. Each brief captures what was confusing, what took longer than it should have, what they wish had been documented, and what they had to figure out themselves. Synthesize after four new hires. You will have a prioritized list of what to actually fix — not assumptions about what new engineers need.

  • Onboarding friction captured at source — from the people who just experienced it
  • Brief surfaces the specific gaps, not generic 'better docs' feedback
  • Synthesize across cohorts to prioritize what's worth fixing vs. one-off confusion

Cross-team Alignment

Two teams share an API. Both think the other team owns the contract. We find out there's a mismatch in production on a Friday afternoon.

Run a structured alignment session with the teams that share a system, interface, or dependency. Each brief captures each team's understanding of ownership, expectations, and pain points — surfacing the gaps before they become incidents. After two sessions with different teams, the misalignments are obvious before the next deployment.

  • Each team's mental model of shared systems captured and compared
  • Ownership gaps and contract mismatches surfaced before they cause incidents
  • Synthesis across team sessions identifies systemic coordination failures

Jira integration

Already running on Jira? Mayetik plugs in.

Jira tracks what your team built. Mayetik captures why — the reasoning behind decisions, the patterns from retros, the lessons from incidents. Together, they give you the full picture of how your team works.

  • Synthesis action items become Jira issues automatically
  • Link Mayetik sessions to Jira projects and sprints
  • Mayetik knowledge surfaces inside Jira — without leaving your workflow
  • Campaign retros map to Jira project components
Sprint 47 Retrospective — Mayetik brief
Top blockerDeployment pipeline — 3 of 5 engineers flagged it
What workedAsync code review process introduced in Sprint 45
Action items2 created → Jira issues ENG-1847, ENG-1848
Last sprint checkENG-1821 resolved · ENG-1822 still open

Docs integrations

Synthesis lands where your team already reads.

Connect Mayetik to your documentation platform in org settings. Once configured, any completed synthesis shows a one-click push button — formatted content, no copy-paste. Use outbound webhooks to trigger Zapier, Make, or n8n workflows when a brief or synthesis is ready.

Confluence

Synthesis converted to Confluence Storage Format — headings, lists, and emphasis preserved as native wiki markup.

Uses the same Atlassian API token as Jira.

Notion

Synthesis converted to native Notion blocks — heading_1/2/3, paragraphs, bullet lists, and inline bold/italic.

Internal integration token + share target page once.

SharePoint

Synthesis uploaded as a markdown file to a configured SharePoint document library folder.

Azure AD app with Sites.ReadWrite.All permission.

Google Drive

Synthesis uploaded as a markdown file to a configured Drive folder via a service account.

Share the folder with the service account email once.

Built for engineering velocity

No process overhead. Up and running in under five minutes.

Engineers responding to your retro or post-mortem session never need an account. Share a link, they respond in a browser tab. Voice input is available for those who prefer to talk. Sessions take 20 minutes. The brief is ready when they finish.

No account needed for respondentsVoice input availableBrief generated automaticallySearchable across all sessionsJira, Confluence, Notion, SharePoint, Google DriveZapier, Make, and n8n via webhooks
Recommended starting point

Start with your next retrospective

Your next sprint ends in a few days. Instead of a sticky-note retro that generates a list nobody revisits, run a structured session. The brief will tell you what the team actually thinks — and whether last sprint’s action items changed anything.

Run four retros and synthesize. You will see which friction points are resolving and which ones are structural — something individual retros never reveal.

Sprint Retrospective

Template
1.

What slowed you down most this sprint — and was it the same thing as last sprint?

2.

What did we ship that you're proud of, and why did it go well?

3.

What's one decision we made this sprint that you'd make differently in hindsight?

4.

Did last sprint's action items actually change anything? Which ones?

5.

What's the one thing that would make the next sprint noticeably better?

5 questions · ~20 min · AI brief generated on completion

Start with the sprint that just ended.

Free 30-day trial. No credit card. Engineers responding to your session don’t need an account. You’ll have a live retro ready in under five minutes.

The brief will surface one thing the team actually thinks that your current retro format never captures. That’s usually enough to make the second session obvious.

Also built for marketing teams · organizations · small business · Full product overview →