Nobody trusts the wiki, and everybody is right not to.
Synaply exists because companies do not have a documentation problem. They have a which one of these is still true problem, and no tool they own can answer it.
It is all written down. That was never the hard part.
Every company this size has more documentation than anyone can read. What it does not have is any way to tell which of it still holds up.
The handbook says one thing, the wiki says another, and a Google Doc from 2023 says a third. All three are real documents somebody wrote in good faith.
A policy changed in March. The three documents that describe it did not. Nothing in any tool you own will tell you that.
They ask a colleague instead, which works until that colleague leaves, and quietly makes one person the single point of failure for how things get done.
A layer over the tools you already have, not another place to put things.
It connects to Drive, SharePoint, Slack, Confluence and the rest, and reads them where they sit, under the permissions they already carry. Nothing is migrated and no second copy is created. Then it does the part nobody has time for: it checks.
Three things we decided we would never do.
A tool that reads everything a company knows has to be trustworthy in a way most software does not. These are not features. They are constraints we designed around, and they cost us capabilities we would otherwise have shipped.
Synaply reads them. Anything it writes is a separate document with its own name, its own history and its sources listed. Your originals are never touched.
Every answer is filtered to what the person asking could already open. If you cannot see a document, you will not learn that it exists, or how many like it there are.
When the evidence is not there, the gap stays open and says why. Fabricating something plausible would defeat the entire point of the product.
Companies big enough to have contradicted themselves.
Somewhere between fifty and a few thousand people is where this starts to hurt. Below that everyone still knows everyone. Above it, you already have a documentation team and a budget to match.
- Operations leaders who own processes nobody has reread in a year
- IT and security teams answering the same access question weekly
- Anyone about to face an audit with documentation they have not opened
- Teams pointing AI assistants at company material and hoping for the best
Every tenant is isolated, sensitive data is encrypted with managed keys, and every action is logged. Our own compliance posture is public, because asking a company to connect its entire document estate and then being vague about security would be absurd.
Point us at one folder and find out.
We will run a check across it and show you what holds up, what went stale without anyone noticing, and what nobody has ever looked at.