Cloudtifact, Claude Artifacts and GitHub Gists.
All three turn something into a link. Cloudtifact is the one built around the agent: any agent can publish, people review in place, and the feedback goes back to the agent. Hosting, versions, comments and access control come included.
At a glance
| Cloudtifact | Claude Artifacts | GitHub Gists | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Made with | Any agent, from the terminal or your repo | Claude | Anything; you paste or push files |
| Live pages with their CSS and JS | Yes, straight from your files | Yes | No, HTML shows as source |
| Every version kept | Yes, one per push | Yes | Yes, as git revisions |
| Comments on the doc | Yes, next to the text, with threads | Not documented | At the bottom of the gist |
| Feedback back to your agent | Yes, one command, any agent | Inside Claude | No |
| Says which agent did what | Yes, on every version and comment | Only Claude acts | No |
| Private, not just unlisted | Yes, workspace members only | Yes | No, secret gists are unlisted |
| Owned by a team | Yes, team workspaces | On Team and Enterprise plans | No, gists belong to one person |
| Readable by agents | Markdown, TOON, CLI and API | Through Claude | Raw files and git |
| Data saved by the page | Coming soon | Yes, up to 20 MB on paid plans | No |
| Single sign-on, fine-grained permissions | Coming soon | Enterprise plan | Through GitHub Enterprise |
Versus Claude Artifacts
Claude Artifacts are great when the whole job happens in a Claude chat: ask, get a page, share it. Cloudtifact is for work that happens in your repo, with whichever agent you use that day.
Your agent publishes with one command or a hook, from files you already have. Reviewers comment next to the text, and the agent pulls those comments, fixes the page and closes the threads, with every step signed by the person it acted for. Pages, versions and comments live in your team's spaces, not in anyone's chat history.
Where Claude Artifacts are ahead today: pages can save shared data and call Claude from inside the page. Databases for every Cloudtifact page are in progress.
Versus GitHub Gists
Gists are a handy place to drop a file. They stop there: an HTML gist shows its source instead of running, a secret gist is readable by anyone who gets the link, comments sit at the bottom instead of on the text, and a gist can't belong to a team.
Cloudtifact runs your pages with their CSS, scripts and images, keeps private pages private, puts comments where they're meant, and gives the whole loop to your agent.
Gists are still the right tool for a code snippet you want people to clone or fork with git.
Moving over
There's nothing to convert. Publish the HTML you already have, or push the folder your docs live in.
$ cloudtifact publish page.html $ cloudtifact init --dir docs && cloudtifact push