Langdock vs nele.ai

Langdock

Training exclusion is written into the contract, not just marketing: the terms state Langdock engages model providers only under agreements barring them from training on customer content, and for the Azure models abuse-monitoring storage and human review by Microsoft are disabled under zero data retention. Admins set the chat retention period themselves, file retention is documented per storage location, a data processing agreement is concluded automatically with 30-day post-termination deletion, and ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II reports are published. We found no public information on a deletion audit trail or on abuse-monitoring terms with the other model providers, which keeps this short of a full account.

nele.ai

The privacy policy puts in writing that user inputs may be neither stored at the AI providers nor used for learning, and caps log files at 30 days before deletion or anonymisation — a prompt-logging rule a works council can at least read. The no-training pledge is expressly conditional on the functions the providers make available, the providers behind the product are not named, and we found no public information on retention periods for chats and files or on a data processing agreement for business customers. A one-line claim of GDPR compliance and ISO 27001 certification on the legal notice is the only certification statement we hold.

Langdock

EU-only processing is the default and leaving the EU requires an active customer choice, with hosting in Frankfurt on Microsoft Azure under the EU Data Boundary and data at rest staying in EU data centres even for global models — commitments that sit in the data processing agreement, not only on a marketing page. Bring-your-own-key is documented so the workspace runs only on customer-configured models, and own-cloud or on-premises deployment is offered from 5,000 seats. We found no public information stating the inference region for each of the forty-plus available models individually.

nele.ai

A German server location is stated, user inputs are processed on the vendor's own servers rather than sent directly to the AI providers, and hosting infrastructure is named as Azure in Frankfurt and Hetzner. What no captured page confirms is which models sit behind the product, who runs them, or where inference takes place — the pages on the vendor's AI models yielded no confirmed model names or providers, and no way for an admin to pin or restrict processing.

Langdock

SAML 2.0 with any compatible identity provider, SCIM on the business tier, role-based access control, mirrored source-tool permissions and a governance module where admins review, approve, flag or disable agents against automated compliance rules that check configuration rather than what people say in chats — and usage analytics can be switched off per workspace, with usage exports by CSV and API. For my side of the table the gaps matter: we found no public information on exportable audit logs, data-loss prevention, prompt-logging rules set out in writing, or usage reporting that can be aggregated or pseudonymised for a works-council agreement.

nele.ai

The captures confirm only that users can register individual accounts and that one licence covers all users; the pages on single sign-on and administrator functions yielded no confirmed details on provisioning, roles, group permissions, audit logs or usage analytics. For a works council, reporting on staff use that can be aggregated or pseudonymised is something we found no public information on.

Langdock

MCP support is unusually deep: a curated directory of 79 officially operated remote servers, custom servers connectable with OAuth or API keys, sandboxed interactive apps with confirmation gates, the A2A protocol, native connectors for document management, email, communication tools and ticketing, plus Zapier reach into over 7,000 apps, Excel and Outlook add-ins, mobile apps and a unified model API. We found no public information on source citations for grounded answers, on sync frequency or completeness, or on exporting agents and configuration when a customer leaves.

nele.ai

We found no public information on connectors to file stores, wikis, mail or ticketing, on sync behaviour, on an API, or on how the assistant cites its sources. The captured pages name only back-office processors serving the vendor's own website and shop, not integrations of the product itself.

Langdock

This is where my checklist is largely satisfied: workflow action nodes run only after human confirmation, approvals can be conditional so only some runs need a person, agents publish in versions with edits held as drafts, and governance records a pass or fail on every new agent version while showing each agent's instructions, integrations, costs and history. A build-and-test toggle, per-agent cost and analytics monitoring, and a published statement that AI output may be inaccurate and is not warranted give documented limits. We found no public information on evaluation against test sets or on attributing every run to the agent and the person who deployed it.

nele.ai

We found no public information on multi-step agents, tool use, actions in other systems, human approval before consequential actions, or run logs. The product and terms-of-use pages captured give no confirmed details on what an agent can do, where it stops, or how its runs are accounted for.

Langdock

The contracting entity is Langdock GmbH of Berlin, registered at the Charlottenburg local court, hosting runs on Microsoft Azure in Frankfurt, and the subprocessor list is public with locations — OpenAI Ireland, Google Cloud, AWS and Azure all shown as EU, Sentry's error data processed in the EU under the Data Privacy Framework and standard contractual clauses, and any third-country model processing only on explicit customer instruction. A data processing agreement with export and 30-day deletion terms plus published ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II reports round out the picture. We found no public information on the ownership structure, which alone keeps this below the top level.

nele.ai

GAL Digital GmbH is a German contracting entity registered at the local court in Gießen with a stated Made-in-Germany location, hosting is stated for Germany on named infrastructure (Azure Frankfurt, Hetzner), subprocessors are listed with their locations, and US transfers rest on the Data Privacy Framework plus standard contractual clauses. The decisive gap for staff data is that the AI providers processing the prompts are not named among the subprocessors, and we found no public information on a data processing agreement for customers.

Langdock

Seat prices are public — €23.20 per user per month standard and €99.00 Business Max with 5x more usage than Standard seat, save 20% on annual billing — alongside workflows at €449.00 per workspace per month for 40k workflow runs, a governance add-on at €2.80 per user per month free until January 1, 2027, per-token API rates, deployment minimums by seat count, and contract notice periods and renewal pricing in the published terms. What a buyer still cannot compute: the fair-use quantum behind a seat, overage rates ("contact us for higher limits"), and the Enterprise tier's custom price.

nele.ai

The only pricing-related fact we hold is the licence statement "Eine Lizenz für alle Nutzer:innen" (one licence for all users); the captured pricing page yielded no confirmed figures for tiers, per-seat prices, usage limits or term. A works council asked to cost the tool cannot compute an annual price from public information in this form.