# Composal vs reviewdog

reviewdog transports source-analysis diagnostics into review workflows; the underlying analyzers determine what it can detect. Composal checks user-visible browser behavior and creates reproducible QA Findings.

## Composal

Composal sends AI browser agents to use your running web app and check the outcomes you care about. Define journeys as plain-English Scenarios, map existing flows with Discovery, or explore for bugs with Deep Scan. Runs keep recordings and reproduction steps so your team or coding agent can investigate a Finding.

[Verify documentation](https://composal.com/docs/verify)

## reviewdog

Presenting lint and analysis results in code reviews

reviewdog consumes linter diagnostics and reports them in supported code review services. It runs in CI and can filter findings to changed lines.

## What each tool does

| Workflow | Composal | reviewdog |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [Run browser journeys](https://composal.com/product/scenarios) | ✓ Yes: Run saved browser Scenarios and return recordings and reproducible Findings. | × No: The documented product reviews or analyzes source changes; it does not execute browser journeys. |
| [Map application workflows](https://composal.com/product/discovery) | ✓ Yes: Discovery maps key application areas and user journeys. | – Not confirmed: Check whether this product includes this workflow in your intended plan and setup. |
| [Explore for unexpected issues](https://composal.com/product/deep-scan) | ✓ Yes: Deep Scan explores the running application and reports reproducible issues. | – Not confirmed: Check whether this product includes this workflow in your intended plan and setup. |
| [Describe checks in plain English](https://composal.com/product/scenarios) | ✓ Yes: Author Scenarios around the intended user outcome, then review the steps and expected results. | – Not confirmed: Check whether this product includes this workflow in your intended plan and setup. |
| [Run or inspect from a terminal](https://composal.com/product/cli) | ✓ Yes: Use the CLI to start and inspect verification runs and their Findings. | – With setup: Connect its specialist checks to your development workflow using supported integrations. |
| Source code review and analysis | × No: Use a dedicated tool for this specialist workflow alongside Composal’s browser verification. | ✓ Yes: reviewdog consumes linter diagnostics and reports them in supported code review services. It runs in CI and can filter findings to changed lines. |

With setup means you supply code or configuration. Not confirmed means support for this workflow needs checking with the vendor.

## Where each fits

Choose reviewdog when your team wants to surface existing linter output on pull requests. Choose Composal for runtime web QA. Pairing them preserves both static diagnostics and execution evidence.

## Try this evaluation

Wire one existing linter through reviewdog and select a changed browser flow for Composal. Compare how each result is triaged, whether it points to the responsible code or user outcome, and time to reproduce.

### Coverage

Which user outcomes must this release prove, and which specialist checks must stay in your existing stack?

### Setup

Who prepares accounts, test data, permissions and access to the deployment being tested?

### Evidence

Can the engineer reproduce a reported failure from the recording and steps, without asking the tester to investigate again?

### Ownership

Who updates the checks when the product changes, and can the team review what a passing result actually proves?

## Related comparisons

- [Composal vs Danger JS](https://composal.com/compare/composal-vs-danger-js.md)
- [Composal vs Bitbucket code review](https://composal.com/compare/composal-vs-bitbucket-code-review.md)
- [Composal vs Azure Repos pull request review](https://composal.com/compare/composal-vs-azure-repos-pull-requests.md)

[All comparisons](https://composal.com/compare.md)