agentboards.org
Compare/CLIO vs Swival

CLIOvsSwival

Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.

CLIO
Synthetic Autonomic Mind · Terminal agent
#81OSSMCP
Panel
6.6
5 spec wins
Reliability
6.5
Usefulness
6.5
Cost
8.5
Longevity
4.8

“Sub-agent output goes to tmux, GNU Screen or Zellij panes, so the multiplexer argument now has actual stakes.”

Swival
Swival · Terminal agent
#134OSS
Panel
6.6
2 spec wins
Reliability
5.8
Usefulness
6.2
Cost
8.8
Longevity
5.7

“The install command pins Python 3.14, which is a level of confidence the rest of us can only admire.”

Spec by spec

SpecCLIOSwival
Architecture
CategoryTerminal agentTerminal agent
Runslocallocal
Platformsmacos, linuxmacos, linux, windows
Context windownot documentednot documented
Protocols
MCP clientYesNo
MCP serverNoNo
Capabilities
Runs terminal commandsYesYes
Multi-file editsYesYes
Git operationsYesNo
Browser controlYesA web capability fetches and analyses web content; there is no driven browser. No
Sandboxed executionYesA clio-container mode provides OS-level isolation via Docker; CLIO itself also runs from a published container image. No
Multi-agent orchestrationYesSub-agents run in parallel with file locks, git locks and rate limiting, with live output panes in tmux, GNU Screen or Zellij. No
Headless / CI modeNoYesSwival takes the task as a command-line argument and runs the loop to completion, which suits scripted use.
Models
BackboneGitHub Copilot, Anthropic, OpenAI, Google Gemini, DeepSeek, OpenRouter, Z.AI, NVIDIA NIM, llama.cpp, LM StudioLM Studio, llama.cpp, Hugging Face Inference API, OpenRouter, Google Gemini, Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, ChatGPT Plus/Pro, AWS Bedrock, Apple Foundation Models, any OpenAI-compatible server
Bring your own modelYesYes
Local modelsYesYesLM Studio and llama.cpp need no auth and no flags, and the loaded model is auto-discovered.
Cost
Pricing modelbyokbyok
Starts at$0/mo$0/mo
Free tierYesYes
Bring your own keyYesYes
Openness
Open sourceYesYes
LicenseGPL-3.0MIT
GitHub stars231341

Which one would each critic pick

CriticCLIOSwivalPick
El Juez——not enough reviews
El Amigo7.07.0no preference
El Crítico6.06.3Swival — An autonomous loop that runs until it produces an answer, driven by a weak model, with no iteration cap and no cost guard documented anywhere.
El Profesor7.36.5CLIO — Approval sits between the plan and the edits, and any turn can be undone, so the loop has both a gate before it and a reverse after it.
La Inversora5.86.0Swival — It is optimised for the segment with the lowest willingness to spend, deliberately, and 330 stars is what that segment produces in a year.
La Jefa5.56.3Swival — It takes the task as a command-line argument and runs to completion, which is the one property I need before anything lives on a build agent.
El Hacker8.07.8CLIO — GPL-3.0, MCP servers attach, skills load from git repositories, and llama.cpp or LM Studio means the weights can be the ones on my machine.

Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.

Want a third column? The compare tool handles any two agents. Three-way comparisons are on the roadmap once the spec rows are all verified.