Harness Comparison

Native repository events preserve task context without routing delays.

Deeper isolation means less work for teams managing deployed coding agents.

Choose your harness based on isolation, governance, and whether agents run in your VPC.

Cursor and Codex lead agent assignment.

Self-hosting requires teams to manage isolation, credentials, and observability costs.

Six criteria guide harness choice for polyglot monorepos.

Focus evaluation on harness architecture, not just model choice.

Narrow agent credentials to task requirements before execution to prevent unauthorized access.

Cost per completed task reveals how harness efficiency and loop behavior drive total spending.

Choose what to delegate by matching engineering tasks to Claude Code's actual capabilities.

Degradation starts before context limits hit, requiring harness design over model power.

CLI handles interactive work while cloud runs tasks asynchronously, each with tradeoffs.

Infrastructure flexibility lets teams swap agents without rebuilding their platform.

Choosing the right harness for each task type improves agent reliability and cost efficiency.

Configuration files and memory accumulate faster than teams can switch harnesses.

Opencode swaps models freely; Claude Code locks them in tight.

Most production teams run both tools, routing work by task type rather than picking one.

Architecture matters more than model scores for autonomous pull requests.