Options for Building With AI Agents
Claude, Codex, OpenCode, Scout
Tom WilsonNot everyone should build AI agents the same way. The right option depends on your role, your automation goals, and the level of infrastructure control you want.
Several solid options are currently available, including Anthropic's Claude Code ecosystem, OpenAI's Codex, the open-source stack offered by OpenCode and Ollama, and Scout's no-code agent platform for enterprise teams. Below is a comprehensive comparison of the benefits and tradeoffs of each.
Claude Code and Anthropic
Anthropic's Claude Code is a terminal-based AI coding agent. It runs from your command line and connects directly to Claude models for tasks such as writing, editing, testing, and committing code. It's also accessible through Claude's desktop app and web console, so that you can work from anywhere.
The whole thing is vertically integrated. When you sign up for a Claude plan, everything operates within Anthropic's ecosystem: the models, tools, context, and execution. The Max plan costs $100 or $200 per month, depending on usage. The $200 level offers 20x the usage of the Pro plan, priority access during peak hours, and early access to new features.
The main benefit of this integration is coherence. Claude Code, the web app, the multiplayer workspace Cowork, and the API all use the same underlying models and token context window. This means you're not having to piece elements together, and whichever tool you use works immediately.
The tradeoff is lock-in, tying you to Anthropic's models, infrastructure, and pricing. The platform prioritizes Claude and isn't suitable if you intend to switch to another model for a specific task or run something locally.
Best for: Developers looking for top-tier model quality, an integrated, user-friendly experience, and who are comfortable with vendor lock-in.
Pros
- Excellent coding performance with Opus and Sonnet models
- Clean, unified experience across terminal, desktop, and web
- No model configuration or infrastructure to manage
- Cowork enables real multiplayer agent sessions
Cons
- Expensive at the upper tiers
- No model flexibility, you're locked in to Claude
- Usage limits apply even at $200/month
- Not designed for nontechnical use cases
OpenAI Codex
Although OpenAI Codex follows the same vertically integrated model as Claude Code, it has a genuine developer community around it.
Codex runs in the terminal via a CLI, within IDEs, and through the Codex desktop app for macOS. It's powered by GPT-5.3-Codex, OpenAI's model tuned specifically for coding tasks. It also supports native multiagent workflows, with built-in worktrees and cloud environments that enable agents to run in parallel across projects. Automations allow it to operate in the background during routine tasks, such as issue triage, CI/CD monitoring, and code review, without requiring prompting.
Like Claude Code, you're working within a single provider's system, which includes OpenAI's models and infrastructure, as well as ChatGPT accounts. Although the lock-in tradeoff is the same, OpenAI has cultivated a large, active developer forum and a culture of publishing research, releasing open models, and engaging publicly with the community. For developers who care about ecosystem and community momentum alongside the tooling itself, that difference matters.
Codex is available on Free and Go plans, with 2x rate limits on paid plans. This option is ideal if you're already in the OpenAI ecosystem and want a tightly integrated coding agent.
Best for: Developers already in the OpenAI ecosystem who want an integrated coding agent with strong community backing.
Pros
- Built-in support for parallel multiagent workflows
- Background automations for routine tasks
- Active developer community and open research culture
- Available in Free and Go plans
Cons
- Vendor lock-in
- Tied to OpenAI's pricing and infrastructure
- Not designed for nontechnical or enterprise workflow use cases
OpenCode and Ollama
This open-source option is more powerful than most people realize.
OpenCode, an open-source AI coding agent with over 100,000 GitHub stars and used by more than 2.5 million developers monthly, works on your terminal, IDE, or desktop. It supports more than 75 model providers and works with local models, allowing you to run it completely offline with no API costs.
Ollama is where the models come from and lets you run open-weight models on your own machine. It also offers cloud-hosted versions of these models when you need more compute than your hardware can handle. The Ollama Pro plan is $20/month, which covers cloud model access and unlimited local usage.
This combination offers unmatched model flexibility at a low cost. The latest open-weight frontier models, such as Qwen 3 and Kimi K2, are approaching state-of-the-art performance. Although these models are not quite at the level of Claude Opus, they're developing rapidly and are suitable for most coding tasks. They also offer significant value at $20/month, compared to $200/month.
OpenCode also integrates directly with Ollama, Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, and ChatGPT Plus/Pro, so that you can use your existing subscriptions through the same interface. It doesn't store your code or context data, which matters in privacy-sensitive environments.
The tradeoff is the setup. This is a terminal-first, configuration-forward workflow where you'll choose models, manage providers, and determine what works best for your use case.
Best for: Developers who want maximum flexibility, low cost, and don't mind managing their own stack. It's a strong fit for open-source projects, privacy-sensitive work, and anyone who wants to avoid vendor lock-in.
Pros
- Free to start; $20/month covers substantial cloud usage
- Run local models with no API costs or data exposure
- 75+ model providers make it highly adaptable
- Active open-source community with 700+ contributors
- Integrates with your existing Claude or OpenAI subscriptions
Cons
- Requires technical knowledge and manual configuration
- Open-weight models are approaching, but not yet at, frontier model quality
- No white-glove support; you own the setup
- Not designed for nontechnical workflows or enterprise compliance requirements
Scout and Scout Studio
Scout targets a different problem entirely. While Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode are developer tools for developers building things in the terminal, Scout is a platform for teams that want to deploy fully autonomous AI agents into their existing business workflows without writing code.
The product is general-purpose at its core. Scout Studio gives you a web-based, visual environment for building, connecting, and launching agents across your organization. Sales teams use it for RFP response agents, meeting prep, competitive intel, and security questionnaires. Engineering teams utilize it for internal support and documentation, while customer service teams use it to automate repetitive work. Although the sales use cases receive the most attention because return on investment is easier to measure, the platform's capabilities extend well beyond this.
Scout connects to various data sources, such as Salesforce, HubSpot, Slack, Notion, Linear, GitHub, and more. You can use prebuilt agent templates or describe what you need, and Scout builds it. Agents operate within existing tools your team already uses, so there's no new interface to learn and no developer needed to keep it running.
Where Scout earns its place at the enterprise level is compliance. It's SOC 2 certified, HIPAA-ready, and cleared for government use. This is the reason organizations with real security requirements can deploy Scout without extended review. The white-glove support model backs this up. Scout's team helps you map the use case, build the agent, set up integrations, and maintain it as your needs change.
Pricing requires a conversation rather than a credit card, which reflects Scout's suitability for higher-end teams and organizations that need a trusted implementation partner, not just a tool.
Best for: Enterprise teams and organizations that want to deploy AI agents across departments without developer dependency. It's a strong fit for any team with compliance requirements, a nontechnical workforce, or workflows that span multiple systems.
Pros
- General-purpose platform, not limited to a single department or use case
- No code required; features a visual agent builder with prebuilt templates
- Deep integrations with Salesforce, HubSpot, Slack, Linear, GitHub, and more
- SOC 2, HIPAA-ready, and government-grade security
- White-glove support from setup through ongoing maintenance
Cons
- Not designed for developers who want to build custom agents from scratch in code
- Pricing requires a sales conversation
- Less model flexibility than open-source alternatives
- May be overkill for individuals or small teams with simple, one-off automation needs
Which Option Is Right for You?
If you're a developer building code in the terminal and want the best models available, Claude Code is hard to beat, although you pay a premium for this convenience and quality.
If you're already in the OpenAI ecosystem, Codex is a natural fit. You get the same tight integration as Claude Code, plus parallel multiagent support and a more active developer community behind it.
OpenCode and Ollama are ideal for developers looking for control, flexibility, and lower costs. The open-weight models are improving steadily and are suitable for most tasks. This option offers excellent value at $20/month, compared to $200/month for Claude Code.
Scout is the perfect choice for enterprise organizations aiming to automate workflows across departments without developer input. The intuitive visual agent builder, strong enterprise compliance, and dedicated white-glove support can help to increase productivity.
The agent landscape is still evolving, and more options will emerge, but for now, they represent genuinely different philosophies: closed and integrated (Claude Code and Codex), open and flexible (OpenCode and Ollama), and managed and enterprise-ready (Scout). Make sure you know which problem you're trying to solve before you pick one.