agentboards.org
Compare/Jules vs Roomote

JulesvsRoomote

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

Jules
Google · Autonomous SWE
#141MCP
Panel
5.7
1 spec wins
Reliability
5.3
Usefulness
5.8
Cost
6.3
Longevity
5.3

“Fifteen free tasks a day, as long as you are over 18 and using a personal Gmail rather than the company account.”

Roomote
Roo Code · Autonomous SWE
#123
Panel
6.7
3 spec wins
Reliability
6.5
Usefulness
6.8
Cost
7.2
Longevity
6.3

“It takes tasks from Slack, Teams, Telegram and Discord, so it is now reachable in all four places you had muted.”

Spec by spec

SpecJulesRoomote
Architecture
CategoryAutonomous SWEAutonomous SWE
Runscloud, sandboxcloud, sandbox
Platformsweb, macos, linux, windowsweb
Context windownot documentednot documented
Protocols
MCP clientYesNo
MCP serverNoNo
Capabilities
Runs terminal commandsYesYes
Multi-file editsYesYes
Git operationsYesYes
Browser controlYesThe default VM image includes Playwright and chromedriver, and Jules renders a front end and returns screenshots to verify its work (https://jules.google/docs/environment). Yes
Sandboxed executionYesEach task gets a secure, short-lived Ubuntu VM with internet access (https://jules.google/docs/environment). Yes
Multi-agent orchestrationNoNo
Headless / CI modeYesScriptable through `jules remote new --repo ... --session "..."` and the REST API (https://jules.google/docs/cli/reference). Yes
Models
BackboneGemini 3 Flash, Gemini 3.1 ProAnthropic, OpenRouter, OpenAI
Bring your own modelNoJules runs only on Google-hosted Gemini models; there is no provider picker, custom base URL, gateway or cloud deployment of your own. Yes
Local modelsNoTasks run in a Google-hosted VM with no configurable model endpoint, so no local LLM can be used. No
Cost
Pricing modelsubscriptionmixed
Starts at$19.99/mo$0/mo
Free tierYesYes
Bring your own keyNoAccess comes from a Google AI plan; no Gemini API key or Google Cloud project of your own can be attached. Yes
Openness
Open sourceNoNo
LicenseproprietaryFCL-1.0-ALv2
GitHub starsn/a272

Which one would each critic pick

CriticJulesRoomotePick
El Juez——not enough reviews
El Amigo6.87.0Roomote — Pick this if you want agent work to arrive as an ordinary pull request; pick a supervised terminal agent if you would rather watch the work than review the result.
El Crítico6.35.8Jules — Jules runs your repo in a VM you cannot inspect on a model you cannot choose, and the failure mode is a pull request built on an environment that never installed correctly.
El Profesor6.37.3Roomote — The loop is clone into an isolated environment, write, run the tests, capture a screenshot, then open the pull request, which is an evidence chain rather than an assertion.
La Inversora6.07.0Roomote — The Roo Code team already own a large extension audience, and shipping both a self-hosted build and a managed cloud is the textbook route from that audience to revenue.
La Jefa4.86.5Roomote — No seat cost if we host it, and it already speaks to Linear, Jira, Sentry and Notion, which means it enters the workflow my sixty engineers are already in.
El Hacker4.36.8Roomote — The Fair Core License is not an open-source licence today; it converts to Apache-2.0 later, which means my fork is legal on a schedule the vendor chose.

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.