Google Antigravity vs Kiro (2026)

Google Antigravity

by Google

Kiro

by Amazon Web Services

Pros

• ✓Runs several agents in parallel and reports through Artifacts such as plans, walkthroughs, screenshots and browser recordings, which developers can comment on while the agent keeps working.
• ✓Works from a desktop agent manager, a standalone IDE, a CLI, a Python SDK, and extensions for Visual Studio Code, Visual Studio, JetBrains IDEs, Zed and Xcode.
• ✓Google Antigravity's free individual tier includes Gemini 3.8 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-OSS-120b, with unlimited Tab completions.
• ✓Connects to MCP servers through an MCP Store listing more than 50, and runs terminal commands in a sandbox under a configurable permission system.

Limitations

• –Paid tiers are Google AI subscriptions, Pro at $19.99 per month and Ultra from $99.99, with usage set by quota refreshes and weekly limits rather than a published request count.
• –Bring-your-own API keys are not supported, and the Claude and GPT-OSS models are not available on the Enterprise plan.
• –On individual plans Google may use interactions to improve its products and models, and human reviewers may see them, unless the user opts out in settings.
• –Available to personal Google accounts for people aged 18 or over in approved countries, and enterprise sign-in for JetBrains, Zed and Xcode is in preview.

Pros

• ✓Spec-driven development methodology produces materially better production code: structured specifications let Kiro plan and execute non-trivial features with edge case handling, security, and maintainability that ad-hoc prompt-based tools cannot match at scale.
• ✓Multi-model flexibility with Auto mode routing: Claude Opus 5, Sonnet 4.6, OpenAI GPT-5, Qwen3 Coder Next, DeepSeek v3.2, and MiniMax 2.1 are selectable, and Auto picks the mix for quality, latency, and cost per task.
• ✓Generous perpetual free tier at $0 with 50 credits each month and no card required, plus a $20 sign-up credit on first upgrade, so teams can evaluate spec-driven workflows before committing to a paid seat.

Limitations

• –Newly launched with a growing community. Fewer third-party tutorials, pre-built specs, and community resources than mature alternatives like Cursor or GitHub Copilot, increasing the ramp-up investment required for teams adopting spec-driven workflows.
• –Credit system makes cost forecasting harder than per-seat tools. Simple prompts consume under 1 credit while complex spec tasks consume more, and models burn credits at different rates, with Sonnet 4.6 costing roughly 1.3 times what the same task costs through Auto. Credits reset monthly without rollover.
• –Compliance coverage is narrow for a procurement review: Kiro documents HIPAA for the IDE and CLI, and publishes no SOC 2, ISO 27001, or FedRAMP of its own, pointing instead to AWS infrastructure programs. Audit reports come through AWS Artifact, which is unavailable if you signed in with GitHub or Google rather than an AWS Builder ID.
• –Content from Free Tier and individual subscribers who sign in with a social login or AWS Builder ID may be used for model training and service improvement unless they opt out. Users on Pro and above who authenticate through AWS IAM Identity Center or an external identity provider are excluded by default.
• –Team management is not yet self-serve. Kiro states that subscriptions and usage limits are per individual user, that each developer needs their own subscription, and that team billing and management features are coming soon, with centralized billing and SSO routed through contact-sales.