github/spec-kit at 57cc518d and the official Kiro Specs documentation, captured July 18, 2026. Spec Kit is MIT. Kiro does not publish an open template license in the reviewed documentation, so this site paraphrases Kiro and links to the official source.
Artifact and workflow comparison
Choose GitHub Spec Kit when
- a repository-owned feature directory should work across supported agents;
- a project constitution should constrain every feature plan;
- research, data model, contracts, and quickstart deserve separate artifacts; or
- stable requirement and task IDs help trace implementation.
Choose Kiro Specs when
- Kiro is already the team’s planning and implementation environment;
- the same three-file artifact set is enough;
- requirements-first and design-first entry points are both useful; or
- quick plan should create the artifacts without intermediate gates.
Rights matter for a template gallery
Spec Kit’s MIT license permits reuse with its notice. Kiro’s public content terms do not provide the same open-template permission. That difference does not judge product quality, but it changes what a documentation site can safely redistribute. Plannotator links to Kiro’s official artifacts instead of copying them.Inspect both same-case outputs
- Complete generated Spec Kit artifact tree: the planning flow produced the constitution, specification, plan, supporting technical artifacts, and tasks.
- Manual, source-faithful Kiro example: the three files follow Kiro’s public artifact model but were not generated by Kiro because the vendor workflow required unavailable authentication.