How do I convert a GitHub repo to a text file?

Paste the repository URL above and the file tree appears as a checkbox list. Untick what the model does not need, generate, and you get one text file: directory structure at the top, then each selected file under a header with its path. Nothing to clone, nothing to install, free and no sign-up.

How do I convert a private GitHub repository?

Paste a personal access token alongside the URL. Create a fine-grained token scoped to just that one repository with read-only Contents permission and a short expiry — that is the least privilege the API will accept for this. The token is used to call GitHub from your browser and is not stored on our side.

How many tokens is my codebase, and will it fit?

The counter updates as you tick files, so you can see the number before you paste anything. As a rough guide, source code runs around 3 to 4 characters per token, so a 500 KB selection lands near 140,000 tokens. That fits a 200K context window and will not fit into a single chat message on most interfaces.

Which files should I exclude before feeding a repo to an LLM?

node_modules, vendor, and any dependency directory first — they are usually the overwhelming majority of the bytes and contribute nothing about your code. Then lockfiles, build output, minified bundles, test fixtures, and binary assets. On a typical JavaScript project that pass alone often removes over ninety percent of the tokens.

How does this compare to gitingest, repomix, or code2prompt?

Those are strong tools and the honest difference is workflow, not capability. They are command-line first, scriptable, and the right answer inside CI or a batch job. This runs in a browser tab with a checkbox tree, so you can see the repo, deselect what you do not want, and watch the token count move — better for the one-off case where you are still deciding what to include.

Is it safe to put my code through this?

Public repositories are read through the GitHub API from your browser, so the code goes from GitHub to you. For anything confidential the stronger option is the local folder converter, which never uploads at all. Either way, scan your selection for API keys and credentials before pasting it into a model — that is the step people skip.

The Fall of Builder.ai: Unpacking the AI Hype and Financial Fiasco

The Rise and Fall of Builder.ai: Unpacking the AI Hype and Financial Fiasco

Introduction: A Shocking Collapse in the AI Startup World

In the ever-evolving landscape of tech startups, few stories have captured attention like the dramatic downfall of Builder.ai. Once celebrated as a unicorn valued at over $1 billion, this AI-powered software development platform has recently filed for bankruptcy, sending shockwaves through the tech community. Backed by heavyweights like Microsoft and Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, Builder.ai raised over $450 million, promising to revolutionize app development with artificial intelligence. Yet, in May 2025, the company announced insolvency proceedings, leaving employees, customers, and investors grappling with the fallout.

What went wrong with Builder.ai? How did a company with such promise and funding collapse so spectacularly? This article dives deep into the reasons behind Builder.ai’s shutdown, exploring the financial missteps, the controversy surrounding its AI technology, and the impact on its users. We’ll also examine what this means for the broader tech industry, particularly in the realm of AI-driven software development, and offer insights for businesses navigating similar challenges. For those looking to leverage AI in their projects, tools like repo2txt.com can provide innovative solutions for processing code repositories, ensuring smoother integration with AI workflows.

Builder.ai’s Vision: Democratizing Software Development

Founded in 2012 as Engineer.ai, Builder.ai set out to make software development accessible to everyone, regardless of technical expertise. The company’s flagship platform promised to simplify the creation of apps and websites, using an AI-powered assembly line to streamline the process. Marketed as a no-code solution, Builder.ai allowed users to select pre-built features, customize them, and have the AI assemble a functional application—often likened to ordering a pizza for its simplicity.

The platform targeted entrepreneurs, small businesses, and enterprises, offering transparent pricing and rapid development timelines. Builder.ai’s AI, dubbed “Natasha,” was central to its branding, suggesting a highly automated process that could deliver apps in days or weeks. The company’s vision resonated widely, earning accolades like “Hottest AI Startup” at The Europas and recognition as a “Visionary” by Gartner. With offices in London and Gurgaon, India, and a workforce of over 770 employees at its peak, Builder.ai positioned itself as a leader in the no-code app development space.

However, beneath the glossy marketing and high-profile endorsements, cracks were forming. The company’s ambitious promises relied heavily on its AI capabilities, but as we’ll explore, these claims didn’t always align with reality. For businesses seeking reliable alternatives, services like Its IT Group offer comprehensive AI/ML, web development, and DevOps solutions, ensuring quality and transparency.

Financial Mismanagement: A House of Cards

Builder.ai’s financial troubles are a central factor in its collapse. Despite raising over $450 million from investors like Microsoft, SoftBank, and Qatar’s wealth fund, the company faced severe cash flow issues. Reports from sources like Bloomberg reveal that Builder.ai significantly overstated its revenue forecasts. In 2024, the company projected sales of $220 million, but actual revenue was closer to $50 million—a discrepancy of nearly 300%. Earlier estimates for 2023 were similarly inflated, dropping from $180 million to $45 million after an internal investigation.

This financial misrepresentation came to a head when creditors, led by Viola Credit, seized $37 million from Builder.ai’s accounts, leaving the company with just $5 million. Senior lenders declared the company in default, forcing CEO Manpreet Ratia, who took over from founder Sachin Dev Duggal in February 2025, to file for bankruptcy. In a company-wide call reported by the Financial Times , Ratia admitted the company was “unable to recover from historic challenges and past decisions that placed significant strain on its financial position.”

The investigation into Builder.ai’s finances uncovered “potentially bogus” sales, particularly involving resellers whose transactions raised red flags. Previously booked sales remained uncollected for extended periods, further straining the company’s cash reserves. The company also owed substantial debts, including $85 million to Amazon and $30 million to Microsoft, according to a Medium post . These financial missteps, combined with a high burn rate from employing over 770 staff, created a perfect storm that led to insolvency.

Financial Issue	Details
Revenue Overstatement	Projected $220M for 2024, actual ~$50M; 2023 sales revised from $180M to $45M.
Creditor Action	Viola Credit seized $37M, leaving $5M in accounts.
Debts	Owed $85M to Amazon, $30M to Microsoft.
Staffing Costs	Over 770 employees contributed to high burn rate.

The AI Controversy: Hype vs. Reality

Builder.ai’s core selling point was its AI-driven platform, which promised to automate app development and make it accessible to non-technical users. However, a 2019 Wall Street Journal article revealed that much of the coding was performed by human developers, not AI. This revelation contradicted the company’s marketing narrative, which heavily emphasized automation through its “Natasha” AI. The reliance on human labor likely increased operational costs, undermining the scalability that true AI automation could have provided.

The tech industry has seen a surge in AI hype, with startups often exaggerating their technological capabilities to attract investment. Builder.ai’s case is a prime example, as its platform was marketed as a fully AI-driven solution, but human intervention was a significant component. According to The Register , generative AI can assist in coding but often makes errors that require human correction, a limitation that Builder.ai may have downplayed. This misalignment between marketing and reality likely eroded trust among investors and customers.

For developers and businesses working with AI, tools like Crawl4AI can enhance data extraction and processing for AI applications, offering a more transparent approach to leveraging technology. Builder.ai’s overreliance on human developers, coupled with overstated AI capabilities, may have contributed to quality issues and project delays, further exacerbating its financial woes.

User Reactions: Frustration and Operational Chaos

The shutdown of Builder.ai has left its users in a precarious position. Since the platform hosted and managed the apps it built, the discontinuation of services has caused significant disruptions. An X post by @JulienSalinasEN ( X post ) highlighted the issue: “Applications developed on BuilderAI were entirely built and deployed on their own infrastructure. Now that they have stopped their service, what can customers do?” This dependency has left businesses scrambling to find alternatives or risk losing their digital presence.

Customer reviews on platforms like Clutch and Trustpilot paint a grim picture. With an overall rating of 2.4 on Clutch, many clients reported severe project delays and incomplete deliverables. Costs ranged from £70,000 to £300,000 for projects that were often unusable, leading to significant financial and operational setbacks. One CEO described Builder.ai as “a fraud from the top down,” while another stated, “Once they sell, they disappear.” A Trustpilot review detailed a project that was supposed to be completed by November 2024 but remained incomplete by April 2025, with missing features and additional charges for supposed “new” requirements.

Review Source	Rating	Key Complaints	Positive Feedback
Clutch	2.4/5	Delays over a year, incomplete projects, costs £70,000-£300,000, poor communication.	Some successful projects, agile management, business understanding.
Trustpilot	Not specified	Missed deadlines, missing features, additional charges, unusable MVPs.	None noted in recent reviews.
AmbitionBox (Employees)	2.5/5	Poor employee experience, abrupt terminations, disorganized management.	Flexible hours, some talented team members.

Despite some positive reviews for projects like medical services and nonprofit apps, the overwhelming sentiment is one of frustration and disillusionment. The shutdown has amplified these concerns, as businesses face reputational damage and operational challenges due to service outages.

Lessons Learned: Navigating the AI and Startup Landscape

The collapse of Builder.ai offers critical lessons for the tech industry, particularly for startups in the AI and software development space:

Transparency in Financial Reporting : Accurate financial reporting is essential for maintaining investor trust and ensuring sustainability. Builder.ai’s inflated revenue figures led to a loss of credibility and financial ruin.
Realistic Technological Claims : Overhyping AI capabilities can backfire, as seen with Builder.ai’s reliance on human developers despite AI-driven marketing. Startups must align their claims with actual capabilities to avoid disillusionment.
Customer-Centric Delivery : Timely delivery and quality assurance are crucial for customer satisfaction. Builder.ai’s failure to deliver functional products eroded trust and led to financial losses for clients.
Risk Management for Users : Businesses should avoid over-reliance on a single provider, especially for critical infrastructure. Diversifying tech partners and conducting due diligence can mitigate risks.

For companies seeking reliable alternatives, Its IT Group offers robust AI/ML, web development, and DevOps services, ensuring dependable solutions for business needs. Similarly, tools like repo2txt can assist in converting code repositories to text for AI-driven analysis, providing a practical approach to leveraging technology.

Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale for the Tech Industry

Builder.ai’s journey from a billion-dollar valuation to bankruptcy is a stark reminder of the challenges facing AI startups. Financial mismanagement, exaggerated AI capabilities, and poor customer experiences created a perfect storm that led to its demise. As the tech community reflects on this failure, it’s clear that transparency, realistic expectations, and customer focus are non-negotiable for sustainable success. For users affected by the shutdown, the path forward involves finding alternative solutions and learning from this experience to make informed choices in the future.

The Builder.ai saga underscores the need for a balanced approach to innovation, where technological promises are backed by solid execution and financial prudence. As the industry moves forward, startups and businesses alike must prioritize trust and reliability to avoid repeating this high-profile fiasco.