Sturdy
Governed language layer that redacts, permissions and traces business context before AI ever sees it.
By Sturdy · 3.5/5 Value-Position score (estimate)
Positioning guardrails
Best for
- Teams adopting MCP-based AI assistants that need permissioned, redacted business context instead of read-all source-system access.
- Life-sciences and clinical operations groups that must share findings with sponsors while withholding participant identifiers.
- CX, support and account teams that turn emails, calls and tickets into reusable governed context.
- Security-conscious enterprises that want one reviewed MCP connection rather than dozens of separate AI integrations.
Ideal size: Not stated; mid-market to enterprise people · Has an LLM/MCP program plus a security review gate for new AI integrations
Not for
- Buyers looking for a general-purpose AI assistant, chatbot or model provider; Sturdy supplies governed context, not the model.
- Teams with no MCP client or LLM tooling to consume the governed context.
- Companies that want published list pricing, self-serve signup and instant onboarding.
- Anyone needing a published SOC 2, HIPAA or FedRAMP posture today; no attestations appear on the vendor pages reviewed.
Value metrics scorecard
Time-to-Value
4-6 weeks (estimated)
~30 days to first production value
Total Cost of Ownership
On request
Not published; custom quote via vendor-guided Test Drive
Implementation Friction
3/5
Engineering + admin effort required
Value-Position score
out of 5 · model estimate
Full cost breakdown
Mandatory implementation fee
None
Seat tiers
Not published
Add-on costs
- None
Company & support
Who is behind Sturdy, and how your team gets help once it is live.
Market position
Where Sturdy sits against its closest alternatives. Pick any two of cost, speed, friction and buyer score, and up to 9 companies to compare.
Quadrant view
Typical annual cost × Time-to-value
The lines cross at the median of the solutions shown, so about half sit on each side of each line.
Companies on the chart 6 / 10
- Sturdy
- Compliancy Group
- activpayroll
- 7AI
- Guardsix
- TrustCloud
Add or change companies
Up to 10 companies including Sturdy. Listed closest first.
Stack fit signal
Compatibility with standard B2B ecosystems.
No supported MCP path today, so it cannot be driven from an AI client.
AI & MCP readiness
What Sturdy ships in AI, and what it asks of your ecosystem.
AI features shipped
Vendor describes ML processing of unstructured language to resolve, redact, deduplicate and attach policy before context is delivered. The reasoning model is the customer's own MCP client (e.g. a Claude project), not a Sturdy-hosted model, so key-model and pricing terms are not stated.
Your data & models
- Trains on your data
- Trains on your data
- Runs on
- Not recorded
- AI pricing
- Not recorded
In your ecosystem
- AI connection
- Not supported
- Model key
- Not recorded
- AI usage audit
- Full audit trail
Compliance attestations
* IAPP AIGP certifies individuals, not products. It means named staff hold the credential — not that the platform does.
Bottom line
Sturdy is a governed language layer for AI: it resolves, redacts and permissions unstructured language from email, chat, support and transcripts before any model sees it, then delivers approved context over its own MCP server with per-token provenance. Teams connect an MCP client or Claude project to build on a fenced context boundary instead of granting read-all access. Vendor pages show clinical-trial, agency and CX use cases (Laerdal, Hawke Media, MP). No public pricing, certifications or support terms are published.
Frequently asked questions
What problem does Sturdy actually solve?
Sturdy sits between your messy unstructured language (site email, chat, transcripts, support tickets, data warehouse text) and the AI tools your team uses. It resolves and governs that language first, applying policies, redacting sensitive information in memory, deduplicating, and attaching provenance, so only approved context crosses the boundary. Authorised users then connect an MCP client, Claude project or internal tool and query governed context rather than touching source systems directly.
How is sensitive data kept away from the model?
The vendor describes safety as a property of the pipeline rather than a prompt: ingestion is scoped by policy, sensitive information is redacted in memory before context is stored or delivered, disallowed fields are excluded, and every included statement keeps its source, transformation history and policy decision. Excluded sources stay outside the governed context, and Sturdy states no source-system access is required to run a Test Drive.
What does Sturdy cost?
No pricing is published on the vendor pages reviewed. Access starts with a vendor-guided Test Drive, after which commercial terms are agreed directly with Sturdy. Treat list price, seat tiers, implementation fees and AI usage charges as open diligence questions rather than assuming a self-serve or per-seat model.
Which certifications and compliance attestations does Sturdy hold?
None are claimed on the pages reviewed: there is no security or trust page naming SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, FedRAMP, ISO 42001 or CMMC. The vendor markets architectural controls (least privilege, explicit policy, isolated environments, provenance evidence you can hand to security), which is useful for review but is not a certification. Ask for current attestations and the data-processing terms before contracting.
How does Sturdy fit with our existing stack?
Sturdy is MCP-native: the vendor ships its own governed MCP server and positions it as one reviewed connection your team builds on, rather than dozens of separate integrations. Sources described by the vendor include email, chat, transcripts, support systems and a data warehouse; delivery is to MCP clients and Claude projects. It is a context-governance layer, not an assistant, CRM or data warehouse.
How long until we see value?
The vendor describes a sequence of provisioning an environment, verifying the architecture, connecting an MCP client, testing policy enforcement and inspecting citations, with no published timeline. Budget several weeks for a first governed use case. Because deployed environments must pass security review, treat internal approval time as the main variable rather than technical setup.