Building your own DIY agent for incident resolution?

→

Building your own DIY agent for incident resolution?

→

Understand what to look out for.

Building your own DIY agent for incident resolution?

→

Understand what to look out for.

Hyground vs

Claude Code

Hyground vs Dash0

Claude Code writes code. Hyground operates clusters.

Claude Code is Anthropic's coding CLI. Some on-call engineers reach for it during incidents. Hyground is built for production operations: deployed in your cluster, grounded in your runbooks, available to every engineer on shift.

A fair starting point

Claude Code is Anthropic's developer CLI: a coding agent that runs on an engineer's laptop. Some SRE teams, including Anthropic's own, reach for it during incidents. Hyground is built for production operations, with runbook ingestion, shared sessions, audit logs, and a read-only default.

Why teams choose Hyground

Where Hyground differs

Runs entirely in your cluster

Hyground installs via Helm alongside the workloads it investigates. Logs, metrics, code, docs, and config never leave the premises. Claude Code is a CLI on the engineer's laptop, and every tool output it reads is sent back to Anthropic's API.

Responds to alerts around the clock

Hyground reacts the moment an alert fires, across time zones, before anyone is paged. Claude Code runs only while the engineer is at the keyboard and goes idle when the laptop closes.

Spans your full fleet of clusters

A manager-and-remote topology correlates evidence across dozens of production, staging, and dev clusters from one interface. Claude Code is one kubeconfig at a time, and cross-cluster correlation is manual.

Grounded in your runbooks

Hyground ingests Confluence, Git, PDFs, and Word docs into a knowledge base, and writes new documentation back as the team learns. Anthropic's own AI SRE team named institutional context as the missing ingredient for root-cause analysis. Without it, Claude produces what their lead engineer called "an 80% story that's pretty, readable, and convincing." Centrally-managed Skills replace prompt sprawl across engineers.

Audited production access

SSO, RBAC, and a central audit log live at the platform level. Hyground brokers infra access through pre-authenticated, isolated executors, so security review has one surface to assess. Claude Code inherits each engineer's local credentials and leaves command history on each laptop.

Read-only by default

Hyground observes and advises; restarting pods, changing configs, or running database queries requires explicit opt-in. No accidental DROP TABLE in production. Claude Code inherits the on-call engineer's full privileges, so a stuck or hallucinating agent can take destructive actions from the laptop it runs on.

Decision

When each platform fits

Claude Code is a developer CLI. Hyground is a team platform in your cluster. Pick by the job, not the feature list.

Choose Hyground when

You need incident response that scales beyond one engineer with a CLI.

On-call covers more engineers than the one who installed the CLI
Production data must stay inside your network for compliance or sovereignty
Investigations should draw on Confluence, Git, and PDF runbooks the team has already written
You want a central audit log of who asked the AI what, and when

Choose

Claude Code

when

You're using it for what it was built for, or you have one engineer who carries on-call alone.

The work is coding tasks at the developer's own laptop
On-call is a single engineer with full production access and no audit requirement
Sending logs and configs to Anthropic's API is acceptable to your security review
You don't need to choose or swap the underlying model

See Hyground in action

Book a demo

Try our sandbox

See Hyground in action

Book a demo

Try our sandbox

See Hyground in action

Book a demo

Try our sandbox