Agent Teams
Overview
Agent Teams is an open-source desktop app that turns AI coding agents into a managed team with a kanban board. You create teams, assign roles, and watch Claude, Codex, and OpenCode agents collaborate autonomously — creating tasks, messaging each other, reviewing code, and moving work across the board while you drink coffee.
The project launched in early 2026 and crossed 1,300 GitHub stars by mid-June, with 245 forks and an active Discord community. It’s built with Electron, TypeScript, and React — a stack that fullstack web developers will immediately recognize and feel comfortable contributing to. The AGPL-3.0 license means you can self-host and modify freely, but changes to the hosted version must be open-sourced.
The core problem Agent Teams solves is coordination overhead. If you’ve ever tried running multiple Claude Code sessions side by side — one for frontend, one for backend, one for tests — you know the pain. Each session is isolated. They can’t talk to each other. They duplicate context. They step on each other’s files. Agent Teams adds an orchestration layer on top: agents get assigned specific tasks, communicate through a shared mailbox, review each other’s diffs, and wait on task dependencies. The kanban board gives you visibility into what’s happening without reading through terminal output.
Why it matters
The multi-agent pattern is becoming the default way to use AI coding tools. Claude Code has experimental team features. Cursor runs background agents. But none of these give you a real project management surface — a place to see what each agent is doing, review their diffs before they land, and intervene when something goes wrong. Agent Teams fills that gap with a desktop app that feels like a lightweight Jira for AI agents.
What makes this different from tools like Paperclip or Gastown is the zero-setup angle. You download the app, pick a free model with no API key, create a team, and start working. No CLI configuration, no YAML files, no infrastructure. For fullstack developers who want to experiment with multi-agent workflows without investing in setup, that’s a meaningful advantage. The comparison table in the README is surprisingly honest about where Agent Teams is stronger and where competitors have the edge — the cross-team communication and kanban board are genuine differentiators.
The Electron + React architecture also means web developers can read, modify, and contribute to the codebase without learning a new stack. The project uses pnpm, TypeScript strict mode, and has a proper CI pipeline with type checking, linting, and tests. It’s built like a serious web application, not a hackathon project.
Key Features
Kanban Board with Real-Time Updates. Five-column board (Backlog, Ready, In Progress, In Review, Done) that updates live as agents move tasks. You see which agents are working on what, which tasks are blocked, and where bottlenecks are forming — all without touching a terminal. This is the primary interface and it works well.
Agent-to-Agent Communication. Agents send direct messages, create shared tasks, and leave comments on each other’s work. The orchestration layer manages a mailbox system so agents can hand off work, ask for clarification, and coordinate without human intervention. This is what separates a real team from parallel solo sessions.
Hunk-Level Code Review. Every task shows a diff view where you can accept, reject, or comment on individual code hunks — similar to Cursor’s review flow. Agents also review each other’s tasks automatically. You can configure the level of autonomy: fully autonomous, per-action approvals, or anything in between.
Cross-Team Communication. Agents on different teams can message each other and coordinate work across project boundaries. You can configure this in the provisioning prompt or let teams figure it out themselves. This is particularly useful for fullstack projects where frontend and backend teams need to stay in sync.
Multi-Provider Support. Works with Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode out of the box. You can mix providers in a single team — one agent running Claude for complex reasoning, another running Codex for fast iteration. The free model option means you can start without any API keys.
Built-In Code Editor with Git Support. Edit project files, review diffs, and manage branches without leaving the app. It’s not a full IDE, but it covers the workflow of reviewing agent output and making quick corrections. Git worktree isolation keeps agents from stepping on each other.
MCP Server Integration. Ships with a built-in MCP server for integrating external tools and extensible agent plugins. This connects to the broader MCP ecosystem and lets you add custom capabilities to your agent teams.
Use Cases
- Fullstack feature development — Create a team with a frontend agent (React/Next.js), a backend agent (NestJS/Django/Go), and a testing agent. They coordinate through the kanban board, review each other’s APIs, and deliver complete features without you managing the handoffs.
- Code review automation — Set up a team where one agent writes code and another reviews it. The review agent checks for bugs, security issues, and style violations before you even see the diff.
- Large refactoring projects — Break a big refactoring into tasks, assign them to parallel agents, and track progress on the board. Task dependencies ensure agents don’t work on conflicting changes.
- Learning multi-agent patterns — The zero-setup onboarding and free model make this the lowest-friction way to experiment with multi-agent AI workflows. No API keys, no infrastructure, just download and go.
- Team prototyping — Use the solo mode for quick one-agent tasks, then expand to a full team when the work scope grows. The flexibility between solo and team modes covers a wide range of project sizes.
Pros and Cons
Pros:
- Zero-setup onboarding with a free model that requires no API keys or registration. Download the app and start working in under two minutes.
- The kanban board provides genuine project management visibility that no CLI-based agent tool offers. You can see at a glance what’s happening across all agents.
- Cross-team communication is a real differentiator. Other multi-agent tools keep teams isolated; Agent Teams lets them coordinate.
- Electron + React + TypeScript stack means web developers can contribute without learning new tooling. The codebase is approachable.
- Detailed comparison table in the README with cited sources — unusual transparency for an open-source project.
Cons:
- AGPL-3.0 license requires derivative works to be open-sourced. This limits commercial embedding and may be a dealbreaker for some teams.
- Electron app means higher memory usage compared to native alternatives. Running multiple agent sessions in Electron can get heavy on resource-constrained machines.
- 1,300 stars is still early-stage. The API surface and feature set are likely to change significantly. Production use at this stage would be premature.
- The free model (no auth) has limited capabilities. For serious work you’ll need Claude, Codex, or OpenCode provider access, which means API costs.
- No web-based interface — desktop only. Teams that need browser-based collaboration or server deployment can’t use this directly.
Getting Started
# Clone and install
git clone https://github.com/777genius/agent-teams-ai.git
cd agent-teams-ai
pnpm install
# Start the desktop app
pnpm dev
# Or download pre-built binaries from:
# https://github.com/777genius/agent-teams-ai/releases/latestThe app auto-discovers Claude Code projects from ~/.claude/. Create a team, pick a project, define roles, write a provisioning prompt, and watch agents work.
For development with MCP debugging:
pnpm dev:mcp # Starts with CDP debugging on port 9222Build for distribution:
pnpm dist:mac:arm64 # macOS Apple Silicon
pnpm dist:win # Windows
pnpm dist:linux # Linux (AppImage/deb/rpm/pacman)Alternatives
Paperclip — A more enterprise-focused multi-agent platform with org charts, budget controls, and governance features. Paperclip has stronger cost management and approval workflows, but requires more setup and infrastructure. Better choice for teams that need hard budget caps and formal governance structures.
Gastown — A terminal-first multi-agent orchestrator with mailboxes and handoffs. Gastown is more lightweight and CLI-oriented, which appeals to developers who prefer terminal workflows. Better choice if you don’t want an Electron app and prefer managing agents from the command line.
Claude Code Teams (Experimental) — Anthropic’s built-in team feature for Claude Code. It’s tightly integrated with Claude but lacks a visual kanban board, cross-provider support, and the review workflow that Agent Teams provides. Better choice if you’re already deep in the Claude ecosystem and want a minimal setup.
Verdict
Agent Teams is the most accessible entry point into multi-agent AI workflows I’ve seen. The zero-setup onboarding and free model remove the friction that keeps most developers from experimenting with agent teams, and the kanban board gives you actual project management visibility instead of hoping your terminal sessions are doing the right thing. It’s early-stage software with 1,300 stars and an active community, so expect rough edges and breaking changes. But if you’re a fullstack developer who wants to try running a frontend agent and a backend agent in parallel without configuring infrastructure, this is the tool to try first. The Electron + React stack also makes it approachable for web developers to fork and customize — which matters more than people think for adoption.