Campfyrr vs Superconductor: share one agent run, or keep every run in step
By Soumen Sarkar · October 2026
Comparison. If you want product, design and engineering in the same agent run, watching and steering it together, use Superconductor. If your runs on the same product keep making calls that contradict each other, use Campfyrr. Many teams have both problems.
What are you trying to fix?
If you want product, design and engineering in the same agent run, watching and steering it together, use Superconductor. If your runs on the same product keep making calls that contradict each other, use Campfyrr. Many teams have both problems.
- "I want the PM to watch the agent build this and steer it before it goes wrong." Superconductor. Anyone on the team can jump into a run, take the wheel or review a live preview (Superconductor).
- "Support should turn a Slack thread into agent work without waiting for an engineer." Superconductor. A ticket can start from a Slack mention, a GitHub comment or a forwarded email (in beta) (Superconductor docs).
- "Two runs on our product made opposite calls, and we found out in review." Campfyrr. Each run learns what the others decided before it edits the same code.
- "My agent asks things only the PM can answer, and I carry the questions back and forth." Campfyrr. Each assumption goes to the person best placed to confirm it, and the answer reaches the agent at its next turn.
The same day, with each
This is a scene, not a customer: three developers and a PM on one subscription product.
In the morning, the PM opens a ticket from Slack: let customers pause their plan. Ana takes it. She and the PM sit in the run together, and the PM steers one call: a paused plan keeps its renewal date. After lunch, Ben starts a second run to rebuild the billing page. His agent has to decide what the page says about a paused plan. It assumes pausing moves the renewal date.
With Superconductor, both runs are well supervised. Ana's run has the PM in it. But nobody is in both, and the renewal decision lives in the conversation of Ana's run. We found nothing in Superconductor's public docs about briefing a new run with decisions made in other runs. Two clean pull requests arrive that disagree about the same customer's bill. If the reviewer remembers the morning's call, Ben spends an hour reworking the page. If not, support finds out first.
With Campfyrr, nothing is shared by hand. The PM's call is recorded as a decision with her reason and her name. When Ben's agent first reads the billing code, a hook gives it an area brief: Ana's work in progress with its plan, and the renewal decision. It writes the page to match. Its one open question, whether a paused plan still gets invoice emails, goes to the PM as a link. Her one-line answer reaches the agent at its next turn.
At the end of the day, the Superconductor team had the PM steering a live run, which Campfyrr doesn't give. The Campfyrr team had two runs that agree, with nobody carrying the decision between them.
When Superconductor is the better choice
- Several people need to watch and steer the same run. Campfyrr doesn't show a session as a transcript, and nobody can steer someone else's run through it.
- Non-engineers should start agent work. In Campfyrr, business teammates add context and answer questions, but they don't trigger agents.
- You want one hosted place to run agents. Isolated cloud environments, parallel implementations and live previews come built in. Campfyrr runs nothing.
Its co-founder Sergey Karayev's Multiplayer AI Manifesto is worth reading either way. "People are not routers" is the scene above in four words.
What it costs
Superconductor's pricing page lists Pro at $128 a month for up to 32 team members, with usage billed per second and your own model plan or keys (Superconductor pricing). That page didn't load for us, so this comes from a search summary, and its docs say it's free while pricing is finalised (Superconductor docs). For 5 developers and 3 business teammates, all eight fit in one plan: $128 a month, plus model costs; we couldn't tell whether usage is billed on top. It also includes the compute that runs the agents.
Campfyrr is $9 per developer a month, minimum 3, or $7 billed yearly; business teammates are free (pricing). Five times nine is $45 a month, or $35 billed yearly. Everything is free during early access. From 15 developers on monthly billing, or 19 on yearly, Superconductor's flat price is the cheaper of the two.
The cost that matters more is attention. Superconductor works when the right person is in the right run, and someone carries what was decided there to the next one. With Campfyrr, each developer installs the plugin once. After that, the daily job is answering an assumption when one is sent to you.
Verdict
Choose Superconductor if you want your agents in one hosted workspace, with people from every role watching, steering and starting runs.
Choose Campfyrr if your agents already run where you like, and the trouble is runs on one product not knowing what the others decided (sessions don't know about each other), or product hearing about it last (silos at agent speed). See what a session gets.
Use both if you like shared runs but want each one to start with what the rest of the team decided. We haven't tested Campfyrr inside Superconductor's environments, so check with both first. Every product in this space is reviewed in our research.
The problem this answers: Silos at agent speed: "Engineering moves at agent speed, but product, design, QA and the business still work in separate silos."
The principle behind this: Build on what's coming: Unfinished work is a promise, and a promise can be built on.
Move as one at agent speed. Nobody waits. Add Campfyrr to Claude: it briefs every agent before it touches the code, keeps assumptions and handoffs where the team can see them, and never takes your code (what it keeps).