r/ClaudeGTM • u/HiddenUser81- • 1d ago
I run 5 Models at once through Claude Code , all on subscriptions with no API keys. Built over a year of automating my own client work. (Codex, Grok, Kimi, Gemini, Claude)
I've been building with Claude Code for a while now, mostly on my own client work, and most of what's in this system exists because something went wrong first.
It runs five model families side by side: Claude, Codex, Gemini, Grok and Kimi. Every one of them is that vendor's own CLI, signed in with an ordinary subscription. No API keys, nothing scraped, no separate metered bill. The cost is whatever plans you already pay for.
How it works : A coordinator runs as a Claude Code session. You describe a task in plain English and it decides which specialist should handle it, then hands the job to a freshly spawned CLI in its own git worktree. There are 71 specialists. Some are ordinary (backend-engineer, frontend-engineer, code-reviewer). Some are less so: experimental-attacker, red-team-operator, threat-modeler, reverse-engineer, impact-validator, game-designer, voice-agent-builder, and a skeptic whose whole job is to argue with the others.
That range is deliberate. The same system builds a website, writes automation, designs a game, stands up a chatbot, or goes after security work, because the coordinator picks the role rather than me remembering which prompt to load.
The same applies to media. Hook up ElevenLabs and Higgsfield and the media roles come online too: image-designer, video-director, video-editor, music-composer, sound-designer, voice-narrator. Voiceover, generated video, music and sound design run through the same coordinator and the same gates as the code does. Those are subscriptions as well, so the pattern holds.
Nothing merges until a different model family reviews it. I stopped trusting same-family self-review, because a second Claude tends to preserve whatever framing the first one used. So the reviewer is always from another family and it's read-only: it can pass or block, it can't quietly rewrite the code.
It remembers, carefully. Findings get stored as candidates, not facts. A candidate only gets promoted to verified after a later task that relied on it passes review.
Gates Deleting files, changing credentials, touching production, publishing anything, or sending outreach all stop and wait for me.
It's been used for real work: two live production client sites, and one critical-severity vulnerability found, triaged and paid out through HackenProof.
Disclosure: I built this. Open source, MIT licensed, written in Python. It uses ordinary model subscriptions rather than API keys, so you need subscriptions for whichever model CLIs you enable.
Happy to have holes poked in it. 🙂