GitSniff vs Cursor BugBot

Review in GitHub, not in an IDE.

GitSniff lives on the pull request. BugBot routes you back to Cursor.

Head to head

The differences that matter.

Feature
GitSniff
Cursor BugBot
Pricing model
Per token reviewed
$40 per user, per month
10 developers, 100 PRs/mo
~$50 total
$400 minimum
Where fixes land
Native github diffs
Cursor IDE or web agent
IDE requirement
None
Cursor for full workflow
Model choice
100+ via OpenRouter
Cursor internal models
Dedicated security scanners
Bearer, Semgrep, Trivy
AI inference only
Model choice per PR
External contributor cost
$0
Billed as a seat
Why switch

Three reasons teams move to GitSniff.

01

GitHub is the review surface.

Comments, suggestions, and fixes live on the PR. Engineers who use Vim, Zed, or VS Code work the same as Cursor users.

02

Real scanners, not AI guesses.

Bearer finds PII leaks. Semgrep catches injection patterns. Trivy flags vulnerable deps. BugBot asks an LLM instead.

03

Open source stays free.

External contributors to your OSS project never hit your bill. BugBot counts every PR author as a seat.

What you get

The full picture.

Editor-agnostic

Works with any editor, any OS. The review happens on GitHub, not in your tool of choice.

Any frontier model

Route to Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek — picked per repo or per PR, not bundled with an IDE license.

Usage billing

A quiet sprint costs almost nothing. A refactor week costs more. Scales with work, not payroll.

Inline auto-fix

Approve suggestions directly on the diff. No context switch to another surface.

Multi-stage filtering

Quality passes remove low-signal findings before they ever reach the PR.

Chat on the PR

Ask GitSniff why it flagged something. The answer stays threaded in GitHub.

Get started

Keep your editor. Replace the reviewer.

Install the GitHub app and your next PR gets reviewed without asking anyone to change tooling.