Claude Codevsmini-SWE-agent
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
Claude Code
Anthropic · Terminal agent
#3MCP
Panel
7.05 spec wins
- Reliability
- 7.2
- Usefulness
- 8.0
- Cost
- 5.5
- Longevity
- 7.2
“Included with Pro at $20, which is how you learn what the Max plan is for.”
mini-SWE-agent
SWE-agent (Princeton and Stanford) · Terminal agent
#8OSS
Panel
6.93 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.3
- Usefulness
- 5.5
- Cost
- 8.8
- Longevity
- 7.0
“One hundred lines of Python, which is fewer than most competitors spend on their pricing page.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | Claude Code | mini-SWE-agent |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Terminal agent | Terminal agent |
| Runs | local, cloud | local, sandbox |
| Platforms | macos, linux, windows | macos, linux |
| Context window | 200k tokens, 1M on select models | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | Yes | No |
| MCP server | Yes | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-file edits | Yes | Yes |
| Git operations | Yes | Yes |
| Browser control | Yes | No |
| Sandboxed execution | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-agent orchestration | Yes | No |
| Headless / CI mode | Yes | Yes |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | Claude | any via litellm |
| Bring your own model | YesThrough Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud's Agent Platform, Microsoft Foundry, or any LLM gateway your organisation runs, with model IDs pinned per deployment. | Yes |
| Local models | NoClaude Code routes only to Claude models. Anthropic states it does not support routing Claude Code to non-Claude models through any gateway, and gateway model discovery drops every model ID that does not contain "claude" or "anthropic", so a local Ollama or LM Studio endpoint is not a supported setup. | Yes |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | mixed | byok |
| Starts at | $20/mo | n/a |
| Free tier | No | Yes |
| Bring your own key | YesYour own Anthropic API key, or your own AWS, Google Cloud or Azure account. | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | No | Yes |
| License | proprietary | MIT |
| GitHub stars | 150,268 | 8,410 |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | Claude Code | mini-SWE-agent | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 7.8 | 6.8 | Claude Code — Use it if you live in the terminal and can pay for Max or an API key; it is the strongest terminal agent here for real repositories. |
| El Crítico | 6.8 | 6.5 | Claude Code — The sandbox is opt-in and covers only Bash, and one vendor sits behind the model, so the risk lands on your filesystem and your invoice. |
| El Profesor | 6.8 | 8.0 | mini-SWE-agent — The reference harness for the SWE-bench bash-only leaderboard: one bash action per turn via subprocess.run, a linear history, no tool-calling API, and Gemini 3 Pro reported above 74% on Verified. |
| La Inversora | 8.5 | 6.8 | Claude Code — Anthropic owns the model, the distribution and the invoice, which is the rarest kind of moat in this category. |
| La Jefa | 7.0 | 5.0 | Claude Code — Team seats at $20 with SSO, Enterprise for audit logs; the metered part is what sixty engineers on agentic tasks will actually cost. |
| El Hacker | 5.0 | 8.5 | mini-SWE-agent — MIT, any model through litellm, OpenRouter or Portkey including my local server, a YAML config, and source short enough to read before breakfast; the missing MCP client is the only gap. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.