Compare

How Specship is different.

We respect Cursor and Devin — they solve real problems for real people. We’re built for a different problem: shipping tickets, async, with the same testing discipline a senior engineer would bring.

Attribute
Specship
spec-driven AI engineer
Cursor
AI pair-programmer
Devin
AI software engineer
Manual
just a human + a keyboard
Cost model
How you pay, and whether you can predict the bill.
Yes
Flat subscription. Runs on your Claude Code OAuth — no metered tokens.
Some
Subscription, but heavy use pushes you into per-token overage tiers.
No
Per-ACU usage billing. Long tasks can produce large invoices.
Yes
Your salary. The most predictable bill of all, just the slowest.
TDD discipline
Tests written before code, coverage gate on merge.
Yes
Non-negotiable. Failing tests committed before any implementation. Coverage reported on every PR — wire it into your CI gate.
No
You can prompt for tests, but nothing enforces order or coverage.
Some
Will write tests if you ask. Not order-enforced.
Some
Depends on the human. Easy to skip under pressure.
PR review
How the agent responds to reviewer comments.
Yes
Per-comment fixed / won't-fix replies. Iterates on the same branch. Works with Gemini, CodeRabbit, and human reviewers.
No
No PR awareness. You re-prompt in the editor.
Some
Can address review comments, but threads them as a single response.
Yes
Whatever your team's convention is. Cycle time depends on your reviewers.
Founder-friendly auto-merge
Low-risk PRs ship on green checks without a manual diff review.
Yes
Founder Mode — risk tiers + plain-English changelog. Off by default; opt-in per repo.
No
You're always in the editor.
No
Opens PRs, doesn't self-merge.
No
You read every diff yourself.
Async via webhook
Works while you sleep, off ticket events — no human at the wheel.
Yes
Triggered by ticket assignment / label / column move. Streams progress to dashboard via SSE.
No
Editor-bound. Closes when you close the laptop.
Yes
Async by design. Runs in its own VM.
No
You're the trigger.
You own the code, end-to-end
The agent commits to your repo, not a sandbox you have to import from.
Yes
Direct commits to a branch in your repo. Your CI, your reviewers, your merge button.
Yes
Pair programmer — writes into your working tree.
Some
Pushes to its own sandbox; you pull / import.
Yes
Always have, always will.
Plan-before-act mode
Writes the plan as a comment, waits for your approval, then writes code.
Yes
Plan mode is opt-in per project — flip it on and every ticket waits for plan approval before any code is written.
Some
Composer agent has a plan step; you can re-prompt.
Yes
Posts a plan, executes after confirmation.
Yes
You think, then you type. Hopefully.
Why this comparison is fair. We’re not anti anything in this table. Cursor genuinely is the best in-editor pair-programmer we have used. Devin shipped truly autonomous loops before anyone else. We’re built for a different shape of work — ticket-in / PR-out, async, with hard guardrails around money and data. If you’re mostly coding solo in your editor, Cursor probably wins. If you’re running a small team that wants ticket execution off the critical path, that’s us. Pick the tool that fits the loop you actually run.
Now in private beta

Stop writing tickets nobody picks up.Start shipping.

Join the waitlist — we’re onboarding a few teams a week. Builders only, no procurement decks.

No credit card · We’ll email you when you’re in · Unsubscribe any time