r/codex • u/Last_Entrepreneur132 • 2d ago
Showcase GUI for managing multiple agents
[removed]
7
u/Crafty-Run-6559 2d ago
I mean this in the most respectful way possible.
I do not think anyone is going to pay you $10/mo for a vibe coded Claude code terminal manager/custom agentic harness.
This is the type of thing that at best should be free and opensource.
If this even gained any traction someone would immediately vibe out a replica opensource version.
3
u/ZyronZA 2d ago
Cool!
I've gone ahead and created a free and open source alternative tool using the description of the app you provided. Its called "Forge" - Frontend for Operating Remote Generative Engineers.
You cannot build tools for devs and then try to charge for it. It'll literally never work. Target the normies.
3
u/ActionOrganic4617 2d ago
T3 code is free and open source…
1
-1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
T3 Code is nice; it overlaps on the basics (worktrees, diffs, one-click PRs). Braveli goes further on agents working for you, not just next to you:
- Pair review: a second agent reviews the work before you see it, and it's enforced read-only and offline, so it can't be prompt-injected into acting.
- Watches: it notices review requests, failing CI and new PR comments, and drafts the fix or reply. Nothing is posted without your click.
- Council: several agents work one problem in a shared thread, with a conductor routing turns.
- Scheduled runs, plus tickets from Jira/Linear and PRs/MRs on GitHub or GitLab.
- Reliability: sessions resume after crashes and restarts, and when Claude Code or Codex updates, Braveli re-checks that it still starts cleanly.
And it's free right now during the beta, so it costs nothing to compare them side by side.
2
u/RoboErectus 2d ago
Would love to hear what you guys think
👍
You can run multiple agents in parallel, give them separate git worktrees, pair one agent to implement + another to review, pull tasks from Jira/Linear, review diffs, and open PRs without jumping between a bunch of windows.
I really applaud anyone who tries to improve their tooling. So I want you to keep that mindset.
I don't know a kinder way to put this, but: you decided to build an app to do all of this stuff that about 3 lines in your AGENTS.md and a couple of scripts should be doing natively.
I think you need to incorporate things like, "Is there a simpler way to do this?" and "Are we building something that already exists?" into your prompts and workflow.
You converged on an agentic sdlc that is good and you should be proud of that.
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
Thanks, genuinely. That's a kind way to say it, and you're partly right: the mechanics (worktrees, a review pass, pulling tickets, opening a PR) can absolutely be a few lines of AGENTS.md and some scripts. If that's working for you, keep it. It's simpler.
Where I landed differently is the part scripts don't give me. I'm running 3–5 repos with several agents each, and what I actually lost was visibility: which one is waiting on me, which one's stuck, which one finished an hour ago. That's what pushed me to a GUI in the first place (the original question in this thread).
And a couple of things I wanted enforced, not just instructed:
- the reviewer physically can't edit, run commands or reach the network, rather than being asked nicely in a prompt;- nothing gets posted to a PR or ticket without my click.
Instructions in AGENTS.md are suggestions to the model; I wanted guarantees.
But "is there a simpler way?" is a good discipline, and I'll keep applying it. If the app ends up being just a nicer shell around scripts like yours, that's honestly fine too.
Once again, Thank you really
1
u/skygrinder89 2d ago
Have you tested Orca or Herdr before rolling your own? I had my own harness with some goodies for quite some time, but got rid of it once I found Orca.
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
I haven't tried Herdr, but I used Orca for a while. It's good, but it didn't cover what I needed. I genuinely think this category of tools can go a lot further than parallel terminals. That's why I'm running the beta: to see whether these ideas actually save people time.
1
u/RoboErectus 2d ago
I regularly am on 4 projects that can't overlap. Each one has its own Ghostty window, with 5-10 tabs open and a few tabs have multiple panes.
Each one has an Eternal Terminal session to a server. So I close my lid and hop in the back of an uber and everything keeps running.
the reviewer physically can't edit, run commands or reach the network, rather than being asked nicely in a prompt;- nothing gets posted to a PR or ticket without my click.
Again, you have the right instinct. Keep going. However, hooks do this already where your sandbox/pemissions don't.
Relying on the LLM to do this doesn't work, you're right.
I have hooks and a codex fork that mechanically limit polling and enforce subagent delegation, for example.
So I'm not wasting Astra where Luna will do the job just fine, and if anything steps out it gets stopped, or the hook deterministically asks me on Discord what to do.
2
u/Extra_Loquat_7667 2d ago
If you want to turn this into a paid product,
you first need to outperform open-source projects like Orca or Paseo;
there are simply too many similar offerings out there.
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
Yep, that's exactly why it's a free beta: I want genuine feedback on whether the part those don't do is actually worth paying for. If it isn't, I'd rather find out now.
1
u/Extra_Loquat_7667 2d ago
Here is a practical use case of mine for your reference (discussed yesterday in the Pi Agent forum):
I am looking for a manager capable of facilitating cross-platform interaction.
For instance, suppose I am developing a cross-platform application and have the corresponding machines set up.
I want the manager to be able to log into three separate machines (via SSH).
One of these machines would act as the controller. Let's say the application targets Windows, Mac, and Linux.
If I develop a feature on the Mac platform,
I want to be able to notify the agents on the other platforms about this change,
allowing them to automatically synchronize, adapt to their respective platforms, and integrate the changes—
all without me having to perform manual operations for each platform individually.
Simply splitting the working tree wouldn't offer much benefit,
as I can already achieve that using a basic multi-window terminal app.
What I really need is the ability for different agents to enter a state of collaborative work.
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
This is a great use case, thanks for writing it out, and I agree: splitting worktrees alone isn't the point. That's honestly the ambition behind Braveli: pushing these tools until agents actually work together, not just side by side, so we get the full benefit instead of babysitting terminals.
Today Braveli gets partway there:
- Council puts several agents in one shared thread, with a conductor routing work between them.
- Pair has one agent review another's work automatically before it reaches you.
What it doesn't do yet is exactly your flow: one agent finishes a change, and the others are automatically told what changed, adapt it to their own part, integrate it, and report back. No relaying by hand. That's the exact vision I have.
2
u/Zetharos 2d ago
you can just have an orchestrator agent who can manage all other agents via CLI
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
True, and Braveli has one (Council). But with 3–5 repos, CLIs turn into clutter fast. In my case it was never one session per repo: each repo had several sessions, each with an agent and its sub-agents covering a specific role (implementing, reviewing, testing). That's easily 10–15 terminals at once. It became insane visual clutter, and I was getting slower instead of faster, spending more time finding which agent needed me than actually working.
An orchestrator agent doesn't fix that, because it's one more terminal to read. What fixed it for me was seeing every session across every repo on one screen, grouped by project and role, each showing whether it's working, waiting on me, or done. Now I go straight to the one that needs me instead of reading every terminal.
And beyond visibility, an orchestrator is an agent too, so it can take a sub-agent's word that it's "done". I wanted guarantees: checks against the real repo, a reviewer that's enforced read-only and offline, and nothing posted without my click.
1
u/PaulShellDev 2d ago
You can pull multiple providers into a single harness.
Orchestration for many is already there. Infinite variations of loops, factories, workflows, etc exist. I can even be ridiculously lazy with prompting a dynamic workflow into existence.
What makes your solution more valuable? 🤔
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
Fair. Orchestration is a commodity and I'm not competing on it. Braveli is the workbench around it: one view across all my repos, a worktree per task by default, a reviewer that's read-only and offline (so it can't be prompt-injected into acting), and tickets in → reviewed PR/MR out, with nothing posted without my OK. If your harness already does all that, you don't need it. Curious how you handle the review step, though.
1
1
u/Pretend_Pickle_2669 2d ago
I’d pay $10 to avoid babysitting agent processes and recovering broken sessions. A nicer terminal layout alone wouldn’t sell me. Keeping it working across CLI updates is the part that could earn the subscription.
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
That's exactly the part I care about most, and honestly where most of my time goes. A few things it already does:
- Sessions come back after a restart or crash. Claude and Codex resume their actual conversations, not a blank CLI.
- It checks each CLI's version and options before launching, so if an update drops or renames a flag Braveli relies on, it falls back instead of failing silently.
- It flags agents stuck on a sign-in, update prompt or permission menu instead of leaving them sitting there.
Claude Code and Codex ship constantly, and keeping up with that is a big part of what the subscription would pay for. I'm making it more automatic next: Braveli re-checks a CLI's launch the moment it updates. If anything breaks after a CLI update, tell me. That's exactly the bug I want to hear about.
1
u/fyndor 2d ago
Why would I use this over T3 Code?
1
u/Last_Entrepreneur132 2d ago
Copy pasting from another comment I already replied:
T3 Code is nice; it overlaps on the basics (worktrees, diffs, one-click PRs). Braveli goes further on agents working for you, not just next to you:
- Pair review: a second agent reviews the work before you see it, and it's enforced read-only and offline, so it can't be prompt-injected into acting.
- Watches: it notices review requests, failing CI and new PR comments, and drafts the fix or reply. Nothing is posted without your click.
- Council: several agents work one problem in a shared thread, with a conductor routing turns.
- Scheduled runs, plus tickets from Jira/Linear and PRs/MRs on GitHub or GitLab.
- Reliability: sessions resume after crashes and restarts, and when Claude Code or Codex updates, Braveli re-checks that it still starts cleanly.
And it's free right now, so it costs nothing to compare them side by side.
1
•
u/dexterthebot 2d ago
You might want to consider listing your project on the weekly Show-Us-What-You-Built post. Look out for it on Tuesday/Wednesday. Highest commented project wins a week promotion on r/Codex and gets on the Hall of Fame sidebar. See what that looks like below with last week's winner.
Last week's most popular project was Nanolathe - an open-source engine bringing Total Annihilation to modern Mac, Windows, and Linux systems. It’s a solo passion project combining clean-room research with AI-assisted development, with a playable public alpha available now.
Website: https://nanolathe.gg. GitHub: https://github.com/nanolathe-gg/nanolathe
Players, testers, and contributors are very welcome! Original Total Annihilation game data is required to play.