Stop counting users. Start getting pull requests.

The bill stops counting people. One flat workspace price with unlimited members — designers, testers, the contractor who is here for a fortnight — and your first 5 fixes are on us.

Why teams move to Snag

Start with the money, because it is a difference in kind rather than in size. The ruttl Pro card is priced per user: it reads $18 a month per user on the monthly toggle and $15 a month per user on the yearly one, so the invoice follows headcount. Here there is no per-user line for it to follow: one workspace fee, and inviting the QA contractor for a sprint costs exactly as much as not inviting her. The second difference is what a report is made of. A screen recording, an audio note or a screenshot uploaded to ruttl explains the problem the way a person would explain it, and that is often enough for a designer. A coding agent cannot work from an explanation. It needs the DOM as it was, the console in order, and the requests that failed, which is what a Snag capture carries. Personal data in it is masked in the browser before anything uploads — inputs are never recorded.

What carries over

Two habits carry over intact. The first is saying what is wrong from where you are looking at it: the snippet puts that on your own site, and the person filing still needs no account, no login and no licence bought on their behalf. The second is the agent. If a ticket already gets picked up by something running in Cursor, in Codex or in a terminal, that arrangement is unchanged — the MCP server is included from the Capture plan up and hands it the capture for whichever ticket it asks about. What is new is the packet it reads: a session replay with the console and the network on it, filed as a ticket in Jira or GitHub that links back to the recording. And the option of not driving the agent at all, because the built-in fix run will.

What you give up

Three rows on the compare page go the other way, and one of them is a wide gap. Editing the page in place is the big one: with ruttl the content, the alignment and the images change in the browser, while a Snag fix run produces a pull request instead. The ruttl mobile SDK reports bugs from inside your own app, where Snag records web sessions only. The ruttl integration list is wider than the Jira and GitHub that Snag connects. If your team depends on any of the three, ruttl is the better pick.

How switching works

Snag imports nothing from ruttl, so this is a clean start rather than a migration. Setup is three things: a snippet, a domain to verify, and a tracker to connect. The number you have been sizing a plan on — how many people need access — stops existing, so there is no seat list to rebuild and nobody to leave off it to keep the total down. After that the loop runs on its own: capture, ticket, fix run, pull request, a person deciding. Snag never auto-merges, and the sandbox the agent works inside is destroyed when the run ends.

Weighing the two head to head rather than switching? The Snag and ruttl comparison answers the questions people ask most.

Where these details come from

Every ruttl detail behind this page is sourced and dated on the page where we cite each ruttl claim — each claim links to the ruttl page we read it on, with the date we read it. Something out of date? Email admin@dvcllc.io and we will fix it.