Harness Hub

The directory · side by side

Compare

Line up two to four entries and see where they differ. The link in your address bar shares this exact comparison.

Claude Code vs opencode. Rows marked Differs have different values.

Open source

Claude Code

Remove

Open source

opencode

Remove

TypeOpen sourceOpen source
Categories
In one lineAnthropic's agentic coding tool for the terminal, IDE and GitHub.The open source coding agent — terminal-first, model-agnostic.
Stage & funding——
GitHub starsDiffers≈154k≈223k
LicenseDiffersProprietary (Anthropic Commercial Terms)MIT
LanguageTypeScriptTypeScript
Last pushDiffers—Oct 28, 2026
Works with——
Built onDiffers—
Built on itDiffers—
Similar toDiffers—
People linkedDiffers34
EventsDiffers0
Pros
  • User reportsUsers widely see it as the strongest overall agent with Opus-class models, and strong with skills, hooks and LSPs.[1][2]
  • User reportsRich built-in harness features (subagents, skills, hooks, plugins, headless mode) that other tools can call into.[1][2]
  • User reportsUsers report the flat Max subscription covers far more usage than the same work would cost at API prices.[1][2]
  • MetadataVery fast release cadence (v2.1.312 on Oct 27, 2026).[1]
  • User reportsWorks with any provider or model, with LSP integration and configurable subagents that can each use a different model.[1][2]
  • User reportsUsers measure its prompt overhead as much leaner than Claude Code's (about 7k vs 33k tokens), and it has a plugin ecosystem.[1][2]
  • User reportsA popular fallback and local-model harness when subscription limits run out; 2.0 added background tasks.[1][2]
  • MetadataMIT-licensed, about 223k stars, with near-daily releases (v1.19.5 on Oct 28, 2026).[1]
Cons
  • User reportsUsage caps and quota changes are a recurring complaint, and people fall back to Codex or OpenCode.[1][2]
  • User reportsUsers measure heavy base context: about 33k tokens before your prompt vs about 7k for OpenCode.[1][2]
  • MetadataSubscriptions can't be used in third-party harnesses, and the CLI has no OSI open-source license; use falls under Anthropic's commercial terms.[1][2]
  • MetadataAbout 16k open GitHub issues and PRs, plus trust worries after the March 2026 source leak.[1][2]
  • User reportsIn October 2026 the OpenCode team disclosed unauthorized access to a legacy system that may have exposed BYOK provider keys saved in hosted workspaces.[1][2]
  • User reportsUsers question its security posture: no built-in sandbox, and title generation sent prompts through the Zen gateway by default.[1][2]
  • User reportsUsers say 2.0 moved tool calls into a background process, which silently broke their sandbox wrappers, and that RAM use is high.[1][2]
  • MetadataThousands of open issues and PRs, and some users get better results from other harnesses with the same model.[1][2]
Best forDevelopers who want the most capable out-of-the-box coding agent with Claude models and a deep extension surface.Developers who want a model-agnostic terminal agent with low prompt overhead and per-subagent model choice.
Watch out forYou are locked to Anthropic's quotas and terms; plan for usage caps and measure the context overhead.Run it inside your own sandbox and set your own small model for auxiliary calls, so prompts don't leave your machine by default.
Links

Popular comparisons