Mimir vs Linear

Linear is one of the best issue trackers ever built. It is fast, opinionated, and beloved by engineering teams. But it solves the execution problem: once you know what to build, Linear helps you track the work, manage sprints, and ship it.

Mimir solves the problem that comes before Linear: figuring out what is worth building in the first place. It takes customer feedback, analyzes it with AI, and produces ranked recommendations with evidence. These are complementary tools, not competing ones.

The best workflow is Mimir into Linear. Mimir tells you what to build and why. Linear helps your team build it. Mimir even generates GitHub issues with specs and agent tasks that can feed directly into your Linear workflow.

People search for "Mimir vs Linear" because both tools live in the product development workflow. But they sit at different stages. Linear is where work gets done. Mimir is where work gets defined. Comparing them head-to-head on features does not make much sense — it is like comparing a GPS to a car.

That said, Linear has been expanding into product discovery territory with features like triage, customer requests, and roadmaps. These features help product teams organize incoming signals, but they are lightweight compared to what a dedicated discovery tool offers. Linear's triage is manual. Mimir's synthesis is automatic.

Here is how teams use both: customer feedback goes into Mimir. Mimir produces recommendations — say, "Improve onboarding for self-serve users" with a detailed spec and projected impact. The PM reviews the recommendation, agrees, and pushes a GitHub issue with the spec and tasks. That issue syncs to Linear, where engineering picks it up in the next cycle.

This workflow means the PM spends less time writing specs and more time making decisions. Engineering gets better-defined work. And every feature shipped can be traced back to real customer evidence, not just a PM's intuition. Linear does not lose anything in this setup — it gains better-defined inputs.