Comparison
Bystep vs Kiro
AWS’s agentic IDE with a built-in “specs” workflow (requirements.md → design.md → tasks.md) and automation hooks.
What Kiro is
AWS’s agentic IDE with a built-in “specs” workflow (requirements.md → design.md → tasks.md) and automation hooks.
- Pricing
- Free tier plus paid usage tiers (as far as we know — check kiro.dev/pricing for current numbers, AWS updates them often).
Feature matrix
Where the two actually differ
Every Bystep item here is live in the product today — not a roadmap promise. Competitor claims we couldn't verify first-hand are marked “as far as we know.”
| Bystep | Kiro | |
|---|---|---|
| PRD generation | Yes | Partialrequirements.md comes out of an in-IDE spec workflow, not a standalone product wizard |
| Acceptance criteria per task | Yesids like AC-checkout-1, derived from the PRD, editable by hand | Yesrequirements.md is built around EARS-format acceptance criteria — one of Kiro’s headline features |
| Verification gate | Yes`task complete` returns 409 without passing evidence or a recorded override | PartialHooks can run on save/spec events, but as far as we know nothing hard-blocks marking a task done without evidence |
| Evidence panel | Yestest output, diff stat, files touched, optional screenshot — stored, not just claimed | NoNo dedicated evidence/proof surface for a non-technical stakeholder, as far as we know |
| Works with any coding agent | YesClaude Code, Cursor, Codex, Copilot, OpenCode, Gemini CLI via CLI + MCP | NoKiro is itself the agent/IDE — specs don’t travel to Claude Code, Cursor, etc. |
| Import / export formats | YesSpec Kit, OpenSpec, Backlog.md, Task Master, Kiro, Claude Code Tasks, GitHub Issues, Linear | PartialBystep exports one-way into Kiro’s .kiro/specs layout; Kiro itself does not import other formats as far as we know |
| Client mode / proposal | Yesclient-viewer share page + proposal for the Studio tier | No |
| Cost per feature | Yesper feature, not just per session | NoNot exposed per feature, as far as we know |
| Indonesian language & payments | Yesen/id UI, IDR pricing, QRIS/VA | No |
| Open-source CLI | Yes`@bystep/cli` + `@bystep/mcp`, MIT | NoClosed-source, proprietary AWS product |
Honest answer
When to choose Kiro instead
- You want the spec workflow and the coding agent to be the same product, inside one IDE, with AWS behind it.
- EARS-format acceptance criteria authored by the IDE’s own agent is enough — you don’t need it enforced as a gate or shown to a client.
- You’re already committed to the AWS ecosystem and don’t need multi-agent portability or a hosted client page.
Bring what you've got, add the gate
Import your existing spec or backlog, let Bystep add acceptance criteria and a verification gate, and keep working with the agent you already use.