AgynvsRover
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
Agyn
Agyn · Agent harness
OSSMCP
Panel
6.62 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.8
- Usefulness
- 6.2
- Cost
- 7.2
- Longevity
- 6.3
“Serverless scale-to-zero with auto-termination on idle: the first coding agent that gets sent home for standing around.”
Rover
Endor · Agent harness
OSS
Panel
6.62 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.8
- Usefulness
- 6.2
- Cost
- 8.3
- Longevity
- 6.0
“You can send the task to Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini or Qwen, which is five ways to learn the ticket was underspecified.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | Agyn | Rover |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Runs | local, cloud, sandbox | local |
| Platforms | macos, linux, web | macos, linux |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | Yes | No |
| MCP server | No | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-file edits | YesFiles are changed by the agent container Agyn runs, such as the bundled Claude Code or Codex agent. | YesFiles are changed by the agent Rover dispatches the task to. |
| Git operations | No | Yes |
| Browser control | No | No |
| Sandboxed execution | Yes | YesRover prepares a local isolated environment per task so agents do not interfere with each other or with your working tree. |
| Multi-agent orchestration | Yes | Yes |
| Headless / CI mode | YesAgents are declared as Terraform resources and run as serverless workloads with scale-to-zero; there is no dedicated CI action. | No |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | Claude Code, Codex, any agent container | Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, Qwen |
| Bring your own model | Yes | Yes |
| Local models | No | No |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | byok | byok |
| Starts at | $0/mo | $0/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Bring your own key | Yes | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| GitHub stars | 239 | 272 |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | Agyn | Rover | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 6.0 | 7.0 | Rover — Pick it if you queue work and batch the review; pick an interactive agent if you would rather steer the thing while it is still going. |
| El Crítico | 6.0 | 6.3 | Rover — Per-task isolation is the whole product and the row never says what it is made of, which leaves the one claim that matters unverifiable. |
| El Profesor | 7.3 | 6.5 | Agyn — The stated design principle is that credentials never enter the model context, with each conversation sandboxed and each MCP server isolated in its own container. |
| La Inversora | 5.8 | 6.5 | Rover — Endor is giving away a manager that makes its users' existing subscriptions more useful, which is top of funnel with no paid tier attached yet. |
| La Jefa | 7.0 | 6.0 | Agyn — Zero licence cost across sixty seats, with role-based access, single sign-on and audit logs in the product, and spend caps set per agent, per team and per organisation. |
| El Hacker | 7.8 | 7.3 | Agyn — AGPL-3.0 means a fork outlives the vendor, the chart installs from an OCI registry with helm, and the provider keys stay mine because I am the one supplying them. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.