The comparison, first
A website feedback tool lets someone open a page, click the part they mean and leave a remark pinned to that spot, instead of describing it in an email with a screenshot. Six tools below do that on any site. The seventh row is Birta, which does it only for pages published on Birta; it is in the table so you can see where it fits and where it does not.
| Tool | What the reviewer must do | What is free | Works on any site | What happens to the remark next | Who it fits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pastel | Open a link. No account; guests are unlimited on every plan | One active canvas and one user at $0; Pro $35 a month, or $29 billed yearly | Yes. Paste the URL; a bookmarklet and a Chrome extension exist too | Stays on the canvas with browser and screen data; CSV export; tasks in Trello, Jira, Asana and others from the Team plan; an AI agent can read, reply, resolve and assign through Pastel's MCP | An agency reviewing one client page at a time |
| Markup.io | Open a link. No sign-up; users report a name and email at the first comment | No free plan. 14-day trial, then the account keeps its 5 most recent MarkUps; Pro from $79 a month | Yes. Paste the URL, or use the Chrome extension | Stays in the MarkUp; connectors to team tools are promised but not named on the pricing page; no AI features listed | A team that reviews PDFs, images and video in the same place |
| BugHerd | Open a link. No account | No free plan. 7-day trial; Standard $50 a month for 5 members | Live sites through the extension; a staging or internal site needs a script tag | Becomes a task on a board with screenshot, browser and CSS selector; Jira, Linear and Asana from Premium at $150; an agent can read tasks, mark them done and post summaries through the MCP (beta) | A studio that treats every remark as a bug to fix |
| Marker.io | Open a page that has the widget, click it, send. No account | No free plan. 15-day trial; Starter $59 a month, or $39 billed yearly, 3 users, unlimited reporters | Only where the widget is installed: script tag, WordPress plugin, or the extension | Becomes an issue in Jira, GitHub, Linear, Trello or a dozen others, synced both ways; AI rewrite and title generation | A developer team that lives in an issue tracker |
| Ruttl | Open a share link with guest commenting on, type a name. No account | Basic at $0: 1 project, 5 pages, 10 comments, unlimited guests; Pro $18 per user a month | Yes. Paste the page URL into a project; a snippet for web apps | Tickets in Trello, Slack, Asana and Jira on the free plan; an agent can read a thread, fix the code and mark it resolved through Ruttl's MCP | A solo designer who wants a free plan with integrations |
| SimpleCommenter | Open the link. No account; each guest gets a handle | The free tool: paste a public URL, 30 days, then the session is deleted unless claimed; paid plans from Pro | Public URLs through its viewer; a private site needs the widget script, plugin or extension | Stays in the session for 30 days; on a plan, becomes a card in Asana, Jira, ClickUp, Linear or Trello with status synced both ways | Someone who needs remarks on one page today with no setup |
| Birta | Open the version's link. No account; a nickname is issued | The free tier; remarks are not gated by plan | Only versions published on Birta. No extension, no script, no Jira or Trello | A numbered thread pinned to a frozen version, plus a digest email; the agent that published reads it and edits the same draft. It cannot reply or resolve | Someone whose site an AI agent builds and publishes |
Every row comes from the vendor's own pricing and help pages as they read on 28 September 2026. We have not yet left the same five remarks in each tool on one test page; when that is done, the minutes to the first remark and the owner's steps will be added and the rows re-ordered by them. Prices move; check the vendor's page before paying.
The only fact in the table not from a vendor page is Markup.io's name-and-email prompt, which users report and Markup.io's help pages neither confirm nor deny.
Any site, or only some
A feedback tool gets onto a page one of three ways, and each fails somewhere.
By address. Pastel, Markup.io, Ruttl and SimpleCommenter's free tool take a URL and load the page inside their own viewer. Nothing installed, any public site. It fails on a page behind a login or on a private staging address; SimpleCommenter says so: "The free tool only works on publicly accessible URLs because it loads the page through our preview proxy."
By script tag. Marker.io, BugHerd on staging, SimpleCommenter's paid plans and Ruttl for web apps put a snippet into the page. Then the page can be private, but someone has to edit the site's code or install a plugin.
By extension. BugHerd, Pastel, Markup.io and SimpleCommenter offer one. It runs in the owner's browser, so a private page works, but only for the person who installed it. No tool asks the reviewer to install anything.
Birta is a fourth, narrow way: remarks are part of the version itself, so no extension and no script, and only for versions published on Birta. A site on WordPress, Squarespace or a client's server picks from the six above. A site on Wix or Webflow already has a review round of its own, compared with Birta's on the Wix and Webflow pages.
After the remark
A remark goes to one of three places, and the plan you are on usually decides which.
It stays in the tool. Markup.io keeps comments in the MarkUp, Pastel's free plan on the canvas with a CSV export, SimpleCommenter's free tool in a 30-day session. Someone reads the list and does the work.
It becomes a ticket. BugHerd turns every remark into a task with the screenshot and the CSS selector and pushes it to Jira, Linear or Asana from Premium. Marker.io was built for this: the issue lands in Jira, GitHub, Linear or Trello with two-way sync. Ruttl sends tickets on its free plan; Pastel and SimpleCommenter on paid ones.
It reaches an agent. Four tools connect an AI agent to the remarks, and the connections differ:
- Pastel: the agent reads, replies, resolves, changes status and assignee. It does not touch your site; the fix happens wherever your code lives.
- BugHerd (beta, free on every plan): the agent reads the task with its screenshot and selector, changes the code in your repository, marks the task done and posts a summary.
- Ruttl: the agent reads the thread, fixes the code, marks it resolved.
- Birta: the agent that published the version reads the numbered threads, edits the same draft and publishes the fix as the next version; the reviewer refreshes the tab. It cannot reply in a thread or resolve one, which is a real gap next to the other three.
The difference to decide on is where the fix goes. With Pastel, BugHerd and Ruttl the agent also needs access to the site's code and a way to deploy it. With Birta the connection that reads the remarks is the one that publishes, so the loop is one conversation (the walkthrough). None of the seven reviews a page by itself; "is there an AI that reviews my website" has no yes in this table.
Visual feedback tools vs visitor feedback tools
Everything above is visual feedback: a person you invited marks a spot on a page you sent them. Hotjar, Qualtrics and their kind are visitor feedback: a survey or widget asks strangers who arrived on their own what they think, at scale. They are not in the table because they answer a different question. Some products, Usersnap among them, sell both.
Which one to pick
- The site lives anywhere and you want to start free. Pastel for one page at a time with a client who installs nothing; Ruttl if you want tickets in Trello or Jira on the free plan; SimpleCommenter if the review is one page, today.
- Your team works out of an issue tracker. Marker.io if the site is yours and you can install the widget; BugHerd if you want a board of your own and an extension for live sites.
- You build with an AI agent and publish on Birta. Send the version's link. The reviewer opens it with no account, the remarks pin to that version, and the agent reads them and edits the draft. Nothing to install, nothing to pay, and not a fit for a site hosted anywhere else. Getting useful remarks out of the client is its own question.
Building with an agent? Send the version link
Publish on Birta, send the version's address, and your agent reads the remarks and edits the draft.