Developer tools decision

JetBrains AI Pro

A single developer can implement a useful JetBrains IDE AI assistant plugin (core suggestion loop) in about a week, but reproducing JetBrains' full product polish, multi-IDE QA, support, and any proprietary integrations is not realistic for one person.

Visit website
You pay

$10/mo

$120/yr

Not verified against a pricing page.

You’d pay instead

$50one-off30 h to build

$50/mo8 h/mo upkeep

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 6 seats.

What a replacement has to do

  • Provide inline AI coding suggestions in a JetBrains IDE by sending editor context to an LLM API and rendering suggestions as completions/quick-fixes.

What it still won’t have

  • Official vendor support and branding
  • Deep product polish, QA across all JetBrains IDEs and versions
  • Any proprietary integrations JetBrains provides (if any)
  • Potential bundled model access included by vendor

What remains hard

  • Brand trustJetBrains: Essential tools for software developers and teams
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

Keep paying

Paying is—cheaper in year one.

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 6 seats.

Paid seatsseats

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying
—

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it
—

AI build —APIs + hosting —

Time you would spend

—

—

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build an IntelliJ Platform plugin in Kotlin that offers inline AI coding suggestions using an external LLM API. In scope: plugin project setup, editor context capture (file + selection + limited project files), request/response adapter to a configurable LLM endpoint with token-based auth and retry/backoff, UI to show suggestions as completions/quick-fixes and a side panel, user settings for model/token/prompt templates, basic telemetry and robust error handling, and unit/integration tests for core flows. Out of scope: training or hosting models, multi-IDE commercial packaging, enterprise SSO integrations, and large-scale telemetry pipelines.
How we checked3 sources · 3/3 runs agreed · evidence score 64

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • An open-source build was found+5
  • 3 cited sources+3
  • 3/3 assessment runs agreed+4
  • Evidence score64

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time - so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 3

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

! Price not confirmed on the page - this pricing page renders its price in the browser✓ 3 independent runs, one answer✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 1 moat quoted from the page