Plane vs Shortcut
Plane and Shortcut are both project-management tools built with software teams in mind, and both ship official MCP servers, so they're a natural head-to-head for engineering orgs deciding where an agent should track work. They differ in breadth and in being open-source versus SaaS. Plane is the open-source project-management tool, and its official server exposes Plane's full API surface across more than twenty modules: manage projects and their features, create/update/search work items, run cycles (sprints) and modules, group work under epics, milestones, and workspace initiatives, triage an intake queue, define custom work-item types and properties, manage states and labels, and log time. Shortcut's official server is more concentrated around Stories: search and read stories, get change history, create and update stories, comment, manage tasks and subtasks, add relations (relates-to, blocks, duplicates), attach external links and files, and assign the current user — plus a branch-name helper that returns the workspace-conventional git branch name. So this is broad-and-open (Plane) versus story-focused-and-developer-tight (Shortcut). Here is the comparison.
How they compare
| Dimension | Plane | Shortcut |
|---|---|---|
| Openness | Open-source project management; the server exposes Plane's full API across 20+ modules. | Commercial SaaS with an official server concentrated around its Story model. |
| Breadth of modules | Projects, work items, cycles (sprints), modules, epics, milestones, workspace initiatives, intake triage, custom item types/properties, states, labels, and worklogs. | Stories at the core, with tasks/subtasks, relations, links, file uploads, comments, and assignment. |
| Planning constructs | Rich hierarchy — cycles, modules, epics, milestones, and initiatives give layered planning out of the box. | Stories grouped into Epics and Iterations, with relations for dependencies between stories. |
| Developer affordances | Custom work-item types and properties plus time logging suit teams that tailor their process. | stories-get-branch-name returns the conventional git branch name, tightly coupling planning to development. |
| Best-fit task | Teams wanting an open-source tool and an agent that reaches a wide planning hierarchy and custom item types. | Engineering teams that plan in Stories and want an agent with story relations and a git branch-name helper. |
Verdict
Both target software teams, so decide on openness and planning style. Plane's server is the choice when you want open-source project management and an agent that reaches a broad hierarchy — projects, cycles, modules, epics, milestones, initiatives, intake triage, custom item types, and time logging. Shortcut's server is the choice when your team plans in Stories and wants a tighter, developer-flavored surface with story relations, subtasks, and a branch-name helper that links planning to git. The split is broad-and-open (Plane) versus story-centric-and-dev-tight (Shortcut). If self-hosting and a wide planning model matter, lean Plane; if Story-based engineering planning close to the codebase matters, lean Shortcut.
FAQ
- Which is open-source?
- Plane is the open-source project-management tool, and its server exposes Plane's full API across 20+ modules. Shortcut is a commercial SaaS, with an official server concentrated around its Story model.
- Which has richer planning hierarchy?
- Plane offers cycles, modules, epics, milestones, and workspace initiatives out of the box, giving a layered planning structure. Shortcut groups Stories into Epics and Iterations and emphasizes relations between stories, which is leaner but tightly developer-focused.