Disbug hands the evidence to your agent.
Snag runs the agent and hands you the pull request.

Disbug is an evidence pipe for AI coding agents, and an unusually well-built one: the extension collects the screenshot, the DOM selector, console errors, failed network requests, the user-event trail, browser metadata and local storage in the background, and an MCP server lets your agent pull one field at a time instead of flooding its context window. Snag collects the same kind of evidence and then keeps going. A sandboxed fix run reproduces the bug in a disposable copy of your repo, writes a repro test that fails before the fix and passes after, and opens a pull request for a person to review.

Where they are genuinely good

The MCP server is where Disbug is genuinely ahead, and it is not a side feature — it is the product. One Disbug command starts it, or it drops into a Claude Desktop, Cursor or Codex config, and the agent then asks for the console log, or the screenshot, or the network, rather than loading the whole report. The Snag server hands over the bundle for a ticket the agent names and writes nothing back but a pull-request link. The Disbug capture reaches further at the edges too, into a DOM selector and local storage that Snag does not claim. And a Disbug report can be a narrated screen recording annotated while it records, which explains a bug the way a person would explain it, where Snag rides an annotated screenshot alongside the replay.

Where Snag is different

What Snag is built around is a single question: can this bug be fixed, and can we prove it? The capture that fills the ticket is the same evidence the coding agent works from. It reproduces the bug in a disposable copy of your repo, writes a repro test that fails before the fix and passes after, and opens a pull request for a person to review. Nothing merges without a human, and the sandbox is destroyed when the run ends. A run that produces no pull request costs half, so the bill follows work products rather than attempts, and the first 5 fixes are free on every plan. The MCP server is included from the Capture plan up, so driving your own agent stays on the table either way.

Which one to pick

Pick Disbug when you already run a coding agent you like, you want it fed precisely and cheaply, and the last mile — reproducing, testing, opening the pull request — is work you would rather keep in your own editor. Pick Snag when you want that last mile to happen without anyone driving it, and you want what lands in the repository to carry a test that proves the bug is gone.

Snag and Disbug, side by side

Every Disbug cell links to the page we read it on.

Questions people actually ask

Does Disbug fix bugs?

They answer that themselves, and the answer is no: their own comparison writes that Disbug does not fix bugs itself and does not replace the judgment of the person reviewing the proposed fix. The division of labour they describe is that they capture and organise what happened, and the coding agent you run reasons about the code and tests a change. Their hero line about writing the fix and opening the PR is about Claude Code or Codex doing that, not about them. Snag runs that second half itself: a sandboxed fix run reproduces the bug, writes a repro test that fails before the fix and passes after, and opens a pull request for review.

Both ship an MCP server. What is the difference?

Scope and direction. Theirs is the product: one command starts it, or you add it to a Claude Desktop, Cursor or Codex config, and the agent then pulls one field at a time — the console log, or the screenshot, or the network — instead of loading the whole bundle into its context window. The Snag server is included from the Capture plan up and hands over the replay, the console and the network for a ticket the agent names. What separates them is not the protocol, which both speak. It is that Snag also ships the run at the other end, so you can point your own agent at the evidence or let the built-in fix run open the pull request.

How does Snag's pricing compare to Disbug's?

It is a difference in kind. Disbug is priced per seat: Pro is $19 a month, or $16 a month billed $190 a year, and the tier above it is $50 a month with ten members included and $5 a member after that. A Snag workspace pays one flat fee and never counts members, and fix plans add a monthly pool of fix-runs on top. The free tiers are different shapes rather than different sizes: theirs is a rolling window over the twenty most recent sessions, ours is 15 bug reports a month that never expires. Filing a bug is free on both sides and needs no account on either.

What lands in the repository when a Snag run finishes?

A pull request. The bug is reproduced in a disposable copy of your repo — destroyed when the run ends — so the experimenting happens somewhere else entirely, and what reaches the repository is the finished diff, a repro test that fails before the fix and passes after, and links to the evidence the agent used. Nothing merges without a human. A run that ends without a pull request costs half, and the first 5 fixes are free on every plan.

Where these details come from

Every Disbug detail on this page links to the Disbug page we read it on, with the date we read it. Something out of date? Email admin@dvcllc.io and we will fix it.