How do I share an Augment analysis with someone outside my editor?

Attach Comma's MCP server and add a rule that finished analyses get published as HTML reports. The agent returns a URL; the reader needs a browser and nothing else — no editor, no repository access, no seat.

Why does a whole-repo analysis need publishing more than a normal answer?

Because it is long and structural. An impact analysis across forty files is a document with tables and file trees; in a chat panel it is a scroll, and in a Slack paste it is a wall. It needs a page, and it needs somewhere reviewers can object to one row.

Can the agent keep one URL as the plan evolves?

Yes. Have it hold the report id and PATCH the same report each pass, so the link in the ticket keeps resolving and the earlier plan stays readable in the revision history.

Can reviewers reply where the agent can see it?

Yes. Comments anchor to the file or step they are about and are readable over the same MCP server, so the next prompt can be 'revise the plan to address the open comments'.

What scope does the token need?

reports:write to publish, plus comments:write only if the agent should reply in threads. Tokens revoke and expire individually.

Share what Augment produced

The value of an agent with the whole repository in context is that it answers questions nobody could answer from one file: what does this change actually touch, where is this pattern repeated, what would the refactor cost. Those answers are long, structural documents — file trees, impact tables, ordered plans.

And they arrive in an editor panel. The staff engineer who has to approve the refactor, the team that owns the service you're about to change, the PM who wants the estimate — none of them are in that panel, and every route out of it flattens the document.

Let the agent publish it

Attach Comma's MCP server with a scoped token, then write the standing rule where your workspace keeps its agent instructions — AGENTS.md at the repo root is the version other tools will also read:

## Publishing analyses

When you produce a whole-repo analysis — an impact assessment, a dependency
map, a refactor plan, a migration estimate — publish it to Comma as an HTML
report and reply with the URL. Do not paste the full document into chat.

The report id is in `.comma-report-id`. Update that report on later passes.

The ticket then links to a plan the owning team can read and object to, line by line, without anyone re-typing it.

Why a report and not a panel

Structure survives. File trees stay trees, impact tables stay tables. The markup is stored verbatim and served in a sandboxed iframe.
The reviewer is outside your session — always, by definition. A URL is the only artifact that reaches them at zero cost.
Objections anchor to the row. "You can't move that module, the mobile app imports it" stays attached to the module — see commenting on HTML.
The agent reads the objections through the same MCP server, so the second draft is a prompt away — see letting an agent respond to comments.
Plans change; the link shouldn't. Revisions at one address let a reviewer see what moved since they last looked.

Worth knowing

Publish private first. A whole-repo analysis quotes your code. Widen the access setting deliberately — see sharing & access control.
Scope the token down — see scoped tokens for AI agents.
HTML body: 5 MB, which is thousands of rows of file table.
Nothing re-executes. A published report is a snapshot; recurring analysis is a routine.

Try it

Comma is free — unlimited reports, unlimited commenters, unlimited revision history.

Attach the MCP server →

Share what Augment produced

Let the agent publish it

Why a report and not a panel

Worth knowing

Try it

Related