Seal vs GitHub PR review for Markdown docs

GitHub PR review is built for engineers reviewing code; Seal is built for everyone else reviewing docs. A GitHub pull request assumes each reviewer has repo access and reads diffs. Seal turns the same Markdown file into a clean browser page that a product manager, lawyer, security lead, client, or executive can read, comment on, and sign off — with no GitHub account, no repo, and nothing to install. Use GitHub when your reviewers already live in the repo; use Seal when the people who have to approve the doc don’t.

Can non-developers review Markdown without GitHub?

Yes. That is the core reason Seal exists. With GitHub, a non-developer has to create an account, get added to the repo, and learn the pull-request and diff interface before they can leave a single comment. With Seal, you send one link: the reviewer opens a normal web page, sees a plain-language summary written for their role, comments inline like Google Docs, and signs off. The free, open-source local plugin runs in your repo via your AI agent (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Copilot); the hosted tier adds identity-verified approval for reviewers who never touch a repo at all.

How does collaboration differ?

On GitHub, collaboration happens as commits, PR comments, and review threads — fluent for engineers, opaque for everyone else. In Seal, collaboration is comment-and-suggest on the rendered document, with each reviewer landing on the slice that’s theirs. Seal is not a Markdown editor: your AI agent or your own editor writes and edits the .md file, and Seal is the layer where humans review, suggest changes, and approve. When the file changes after approval, Seal lifts the approval on just the changed part and brings it back to the reviewer — GitHub leaves stale approvals in place until someone re-requests review by hand.

Side by side

	GitHub PR review	Seal
Who can review	Anyone with a GitHub account + repo access	Anyone with a link — no account or repo for the local plugin; a free account only for verified sign-off
Reviewer skill needed	Git, pull requests, the diff UI	None — reads like a web doc, comments like Google Docs
Best for	Engineers reviewing code and code-adjacent docs	Non-developers (PM, legal, security, clients, execs) reviewing docs
Per-reviewer summary	No — everyone sees the same raw diff	Yes — an AI summary written for each reviewer’s role
Formal sign-off	PR approval, tied to a GitHub identity	Identity-verified approval bound to the exact wording (hosted)
Approval goes stale on edit	Re-request review manually	Automatic — approval lifts on the changed part and returns to you
Lives where	In the repo	In your repo (local plugin) or any browser (hosted)
Editing	In the PR / your editor	Not an editor — your agent or editor writes the .md; Seal is the review + sign-off layer

When should I use GitHub instead of Seal?

Use GitHub PR review when every reviewer is already an engineer with repo access and the document is code or tightly coupled to code. GitHub’s diff view, branch protection, and CI checks are the right tools there. Reach for Seal the moment a required approver is outside the repo — a manager, a client, a compliance or legal reviewer — or when you need an identity-verified record that a named person approved exactly these words. The two aren’t mutually exclusive: many teams keep code in GitHub and route the human doc sign-off through Seal.

Get the free local plugin Try hosted →