Sinatra vs Kiro
AWS's agentic IDE and its autonomous agent. Compared here on the autonomous agent that works GitHub issues, not on the Kiro editor or its spec-driven workflow.
On GitHub these two behave almost identically: install a GitHub App once for the org, label an issue, get a pull request, and have review comments acted on. Kiro also brings a real IDE and a spec-driven workflow Sinatra has no answer to. The split is cost and tracker. Every Kiro run is metered in credits with no published conversion from a credit to a token, there is no way to supply your own key or subscription, and there is no Linear.
- Yes means the vendor's own app starts a run from the issue itself, with nothing to commit to the repo first. Sinatra's trigger is the Sinatra label that ships with the GitHub App install (`sinatraai` on the hosted app). Partial means either that a workflow file and an API-key secret have to be added per repository first, or that the mention only works on pull requests, or that starting from an issue needs a trigger or automation you configure yourself.
- Yes means assigning the ticket to the agent in Linear starts the run. Partial means the run starts some other way: an attachment link you click, or a trigger you configure yourself against Linear's webhooks. Assignment on its own does nothing.
- Yes means a documented HTTP API or MCP server starts a run on the vendor's hosted agent from a task the caller writes, so a script, a CI job, or an MCP client can hand off work and follow it to a pull request. Partial means only the vendor's CLI can start such a run, or the API only fires an automation saved ahead of time, or it is enabled for selected organizations only. Local agent sessions, and MCP servers that only read docs or tickets, don't count. Creating, labeling, or assigning an issue through a tracker's API, so that a tracker trigger or a saved automation picks it up, doesn't count either. Sinatra's MCP server takes an OAuth sign-in from Claude Code, Cursor, claude.ai or ChatGPT, or a personal access token; the HTTP API and the `sinatra` CLI take the token; and every run happens on Sinatra's hosted agent.
- Yes means a changes-requested review is enough on its own: Sinatra reworks the branch and pushes the follow-up commit with no re-trigger and no mention. Partial means the agent acts only when it is @-mentioned in the thread, or only while its original session is still open.
- Yes means your own provider API key runs the agent everywhere the product runs it. Partial means keys work on some surfaces but not the one being compared here, either because the vendor documents them as local-CLI-and-desktop only, or because it never documents them covering its cloud agent at all.
- Yes means a Claude Pro/Max or ChatGPT subscription you already pay for authenticates the run on the vendor's hosted cloud. Partial means it works only where that CLI's login already sits on the machine: your own laptop or a self-hosted backend, not a clean cloud sandbox, or that a linked subscription pays only for one provider's share of a hosted run while the vendor bills the rest.
- Yes means the vendor never charges you for model use itself: it runs on a key or subscription you pay a model provider for, or model use is included in a flat plan and capped by a rate limit or task quota rather than charged. When the vendor is itself the model provider, paying its own API rates on your own key counts as paying your provider. Partial means the vendor bills model use unless you bring your own key on the surface compared here. No means the vendor bills model use, as tokens, credits, or units, at cost or marked up, including usage past an included allowance. Sinatra runs on your own Claude or ChatGPT subscription or API key and never bills for model usage.
- Both halves have to be published: the plan price, and the rate for work past the plan. A published seat price sitting on top of an undisclosed credit, compute unit, or quota size is partial.
- Yes means the free tier states its limits as numbers. Sinatra's Free plan is 1 task at a time, plus 1 queued with no daily limit and no card, on your own subscription or API key; each request runs for up to 60 minutes, and if it needs longer Sinatra stops, keeps the changes, and picks up when you reply. Partial means a free plan exists but its limits are not published, or are published in a unit whose size isn't. No means there is no free tier, or the free tier leaves out the agent compared here.
- Yes means the vendor supplies model access and bills for or includes that usage. Sinatra requires your own workspace API key or personal subscription on every tier, including existing and paid accounts, and does not bill model tokens.
- Yes means an editor plugin or a desktop app; partial means a terminal CLI and no plugin or app of the vendor's own inside an editor. Sinatra is partial: the `sinatra` CLI, and an MCP server that Claude Code, Cursor, claude.ai, ChatGPT and other MCP clients can call, hand work to the hosted agent, which works in its own sandbox and comes back as a pull request. There is no editor extension, and the agent never runs on your machine. If you want an assistant working inside your editor, that is a real reason to pick one of these instead, and several teams run both.
- Yes means mentioning the agent in a Slack channel or thread starts a run on the vendor's hosted agent. Sinatra's Slack app is connected once per workspace by an owner or admin, on every plan: mention it in a channel and it works in that thread, posting its progress and answer there and opening a pull request when the request needs code. Follow-ups in the thread continue the task.
- Yes means you can run the agent on infrastructure you control, or the source is open. Partial means execution or inference can be pointed at your own account or your own machines while the product itself stays the vendor's and stays closed. Sinatra is hosted only; there is no self-managed build.
Competitor facts were read off each vendor's own documentation and pricing pages on September 4, 2026. The “Start a hosted run over API or MCP” row was read on October 13, 2026. Sinatra's terms reflect the current own-credential requirement.
How you start it
- Add the Sinatra label to a GitHub issue. The label ships with the GitHub App install and is named after the app (
sinatraaion the hosted one) - Assign a Linear ticket to Sinatra, or @-mention it in a comment
- Mention @Sinatra in a Slack channel; it works in that thread, and follow-ups in the thread continue the task
- Start a task from your terminal with the
sinatraCLI, from Claude Code, Cursor, claude.ai or ChatGPT over MCP, or over the HTTP API. It runs on Sinatra's hosted agent, not on your machine
- Add the
kirolabel to a GitHub issue, or comment /kiro on it - The Kiro web app, with autonomous mode toggled on
- The Kiro IDE
Free: 1 task at a time, plus 1 queued, no daily limit. Bring your own Claude or ChatGPT subscription, or an API key. On Free, each request runs for up to 60 minutes. If it needs longer, Sinatra stops, keeps the changes, and picks up when you reply. No card. Paid plans are one flat monthly price for the whole workspace, however many people are in it: Pro $20 (3 tasks at a time, plus 10 queued), Team $99 (10 tasks at a time, plus 25 queued), Scale $249 (25 tasks at a time, plus 100 queued). Enterprise is custom. Sinatra never bills for model usage.
Sinatra pricing →Free $0 with 50 credits, Pro $20 a user a month with 1,000 credits, Pro+ $40 with 2,000, Pro Max $100 with 5,000, and Power $200 with 10,000. Add-on credits are $0.04 each and Enterprise is contact-sales. A credit is a Kiro unit with no published token conversion, so a task's cost is knowable only after it runs.
Kiro pricing page →How you start a task
Kiro and Sinatra do the GitHub half the same way, and it is the right way: an App installed once per organization, then a label on an issue. Both open a branch, commit, and raise a pull request.
Kiro is good on the review loop too. Its autonomous mode page says the agent "automatically addresses your comments and pushes updates," and Sinatra does the same from a changes-requested review. Call this row a tie.
Two things are missing on Kiro's side. There is no Linear, and autonomous mode in the web app is started by toggling it in the chat input before you submit, which is a person at a keyboard rather than a handoff.
Kiro has something Sinatra does not, though, and it is not small: Kiro is an IDE. The agent is one mode of a product you also write code in.
What it costs, in dollars
Kiro publishes both halves, which is more than several vendors here manage. What is not published is the bridge between them: how many credits a task consumes, and what a credit is in tokens. So $0.04 is a real price for a unit whose size you learn by spending it.
Sinatra's two numbers are the plan, $20 a month for the whole workspace on Pro, and your provider's own published rate, billed by them with nothing added. Fifty free Kiro credits is a look; Sinatra's free tier is 1 task at a time, plus 1 queued, with no daily limit, so it does not run out.
Where Sinatra wins
Your key runs your models: Anthropic, OpenRouter, a Claude subscription, a Codex
or ChatGPT subscription, pinned per repository in a committed .sinatrarc. Kiro
gives you a model menu inside its own credit system and no way to bring your own.
That also makes the token bill readable, with provider rates on a provider
invoice and no unit in between whose size is undocumented.
Linear is a first-class trigger, where Kiro's agent does not connect to Linear at all. A script or an MCP client can start a Sinatra task over its HTTP API or MCP server; Kiro's docs describe no API for starting an autonomous task. The free tier has no daily limit and does not run out, where fifty credits do. And repository-level configuration lives in the repository rather than a workspace setting.
Where Kiro wins
It is an IDE, and a distinctive one. Kiro's spec-driven workflow, turning a prompt into requirements, a design, and a task list before implementation, is a genuinely different idea about how to work with an agent, and you get it in an editor rather than only in a tracker. Sinatra will plan with you on the ticket if you ask, but it is not an editor: its CLI and MCP server only hand a task to the hosted agent.
Its free tier has Claude Sonnet 4.5 in it. Fifty credits and a real frontier model, with no card and no provider account, is a low bar to clear for finding out whether any of this works on your codebase.
There are also no credentials to manage: no key to rotate, no provider account, no second invoice. For a team that does not want to run model credentials, the credit system is the feature rather than the tax. AWS is behind it, so procurement, security review, and billing go through a vendor most enterprises already have a contract with, which is worth more inside a large company than any row in the table above. And Kiro supports GitLab, where Sinatra is GitHub-only.
Looking for a Kiro alternative?
The two reasons people search this are the credit system and the missing tracker.
On cost, Sinatra does not sell you a unit. The plan is $20 a month for the whole workspace on Pro and the model bill is your provider's, on their invoice, so "what did that ticket cost" has an answer you can look up rather than infer. If your team already pays for Claude or ChatGPT, the model half is already bought.
On the tracker, if your board is in Linear, Kiro cannot see it. Sinatra installs a Linear app you assign tickets to and keeps the GitHub label trigger you are used to, so moving does not mean giving up the GitHub half.
If you are on Kiro for the IDE and the spec workflow, keep it. Sinatra does not replace an editor and does not try to.
Switching, or running both
The two triggers cannot see each other: kiro on one label, Sinatra on another,
with both Apps installed on the same organization. Since the GitHub trigger is
nearly identical, the useful test here is really a model test. Put the same five
tickets through both, with Sinatra pointed at whatever model you would run in
anger, and read the ten pull requests. If Kiro's credits get you results you like
and you never wanted to hold an API key, that is a reasonable place to land.
Questions people ask about Kiro and Sinatra
How do you start a Kiro autonomous task from GitHub?
Add the `kiro` label to an issue or comment /kiro. The Kiro Agent GitHub app only needs to be installed once per organization, which is the same shape as Sinatra's install.
Can Kiro use my Anthropic key or Claude subscription?
No. Kiro's plans include model access as credits, and its documentation describes no bring-your-own-key path.
What does a Kiro task cost?
Unknown until it runs. Plans publish credits and add-ons are $0.04 each, but how many credits a task consumes and what a credit is in tokens are not published.
Does Kiro work with Linear?
Not in its documentation. The autonomous agent connects to GitHub and GitLab, and neither Linear nor Slack appears in its integration docs.
Where these facts came from
Every mark on this page comes from Kiro's own documentation and pricing pages, not a third-party roundup: read on September 4, 2026, except the “Start a hosted run over API or MCP” row, read on October 13, 2026. Sinatra's side of this page was last updated on October 15, 2026. If something here is out of date or wrong, tell us and we will fix the page.