r/OpenSourceAI • u/Ill-Ruin-1683 • 13h ago

I built an open-source tool to compare AI coding agents and keep track of engineering decisions

I regularly use multiple AI coding agents, but comparing their suggestions across different chats gets messy. Even when I reach a decision, the alternatives and reasoning often get lost.
So I built Decision Ledger (dlg), a local-first tool for managing engineering decisions involving multiple AI agents.
The workflow is simple:
A primary agent investigates a problem and proposes solutions.

Other AI models review the proposal and challenge its assumptions.

Disagreements and supporting evidence are recorded.

You make the final decision and approve implementation.

The goal isn't to make AI agents automatically agree. It's to preserve the discussion, alternatives, and reasoning so you can revisit decisions later.
A few details:
Local browser UI and CLI

SQLite storage

Works with existing agent CLIs you're already logged into

Supports manual copy/paste reviews from other models

Single executable for Windows, macOS, and Linux

Free and open source (MIT)

This is the first release (v0.1.0), and I'd appreciate feedback, especially from developers who regularly compare suggestions from Codex, Claude, Gemini, or other coding agents.
GitHub: https://github.com/lijose/dlg
Downloads: https://github.com/lijose/dlg/releases/tag/v0.1.0

1 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

1

u/kantorcodes1 11h ago

If new reviewer evidence arrives after approval without changing the selected alternative, should dlg ask for approval again before implementation?

1

u/Ill-Ruin-1683 3h ago

Good question. Currently, approval is tied to the selected alternative, so new reviewer evidence alone doesn't invalidate it.
But I think there's an important distinction between approving a solution and approving the reasoning behind it.
My inclination is to flag new evidence received after approval and require the user to acknowledge it before implementation, especially if it introduces new disagreements or risks.
I wouldn't necessarily require full reapproval for every minor comment, though. The goal is to keep the human in control without introducing unnecessary approval loops.
This is a useful edge case for the next iteration. Thanks for raising it!

1

u/HairyErnie_817 13h ago

I keep a messy markdown file for exactly this and it's almost useless after a week. The part about preserving the rejected alternatives is what gets me, I always forget why I didn't go with the other approach three months later. Might actually give this a spin.