Decoder tells you what a message is actually asking — the request, the real deadline, the thing left unsaid — then adjusts your reply to land the way you meant, and shows you why each change works.
Join the waitlist Not in the Chrome Web Store yet. One email when it opens, nothing else.Priya's message is four polite paragraphs with two requests buried in them, a deadline that isn't the real deadline, and an assumption she never writes down.
Priya wants the cost assumptions tightened before the draft goes to Mark, and would like Fairfield numbers included if Dan releases them.
Every concrete request, in order, and whether it lands on you or on someone else copied in. When it's genuinely ambiguous, it says so instead of guessing.
The stated deadline and the implied one are shown separately, because “by Thursday” and “I'd rather not be doing this Wednesday night” are different facts.
Tone is one of four readings with the wording that justifies it. It defaults to neutral — most work email is neutral, and reading hostility into a flat message is the failure that actually costs you.
You wrote: “Cost section is wrong, I'll redo it. Dan has the Fairfield numbers not me. Will send Wednesday.” Accurate, complete, and it reads as annoyed.
Thanks Priya. I'll take another pass at the cost section — agreed the assumptions are on the optimistic side. On Fairfield: Dan still has those numbers. I'll chase him today and include them if they land in time. You'll have it Wednesday morning, ahead of the Thursday close.
Your Wednesday commitment and the fact that Dan holds the numbers — both are yours to state and neither was softened.
Four registers: warmer, more direct, more formal, shorter. Your facts, commitments and questions survive intact — this is register adjustment, not ghostwriting, and it will never soften a refusal into a maybe.
The reason on each change is the point. Any chat window rewrites an email. Naming the general rule rather than the instance means you need Decoder less over time, not more.
It also remembers how each person likes to be written to, so the adjustments you get in month two are better than the ones in week one. Those notes stay on your computer.
One button on a message you've received, one in the reply box. Nothing to paste anywhere, nothing to switch to.
It sees what was said three replies ago, which is usually where the thing being referred to actually lives.
Note that one manager reads directness as blunt, and future adjustments to them account for it. Stored in your browser only.
Every change comes with the rule behind it, and a note on what was deliberately left alone so you can see your meaning survived.
The first 15 messages are free — no account, no card. Decoding a message and adjusting a reply each count as one. Paid plans cover 400 a month, far more than anyone sends. Cancel any time.
The message passes through our server to the AI model and the result comes back. Nothing is stored — not the message, not your reply, not the result. Your notes about how each person likes to be written to never leave your computer at all. The privacy policy is specific about this.
Grammarly checks writing you've already produced. Decoder does the other half — it reads the message you received and tells you what it's asking. On the writing side it adjusts register rather than grammar, and explains the rule behind each change rather than just applying it.
You can, and for one message it works fine. The difference is that a chat window forgets. It doesn't sit in your inbox, it can't see the rest of the thread, and it will never learn that this particular client wants the number in the first line. That memory is what Decoder is.
It's used that way and built with that in mind, but it's a workplace communication tool, not a clinical one, and it makes no claims about anyone's brain. It's equally for people writing in a second language, people new to a workplace's norms, and anyone who has rewritten a short email five times. It translates in both directions and always shows its working — a tool that just makes you sound like someone else isn't a tool worth having.
Gmail first. Outlook on the web, Slack and Teams are next — each needs its own integration, and they'll be built in the order people on the waitlist ask for them.