Interesting comparison! I hit the same token limit wall with Cursor and ended up going a completely different direction - CLI-based agents (Claude Code) orchestrating sub-agents for parallel tasks instead of relying on IDE integrations. The biggest win was automating the workflow around coding: draft generation, deployment verification, health checks, all chained together. Went from manually doing everything to 80+ automation scripts in a week. Curious if you have tried any non-IDE approaches? The Plan Mode frustration you described is exactly why I moved away from IDE-embedded AI - too many layers between intent and execution.
I use OpenCode quite often, even created a skill to launch resumae subagents powered by OpenCode. CLI tools are great if you want to build your own pipelines for sure. In terms of general use, see no major difference in capability, be it GUI or TUI. Question of preference and token availability
Good point about GUI vs TUI being mostly preference — I agree there's no fundamental capability gap anymore. OpenCode looks interesting, hadn't seen the resumable subagent pattern before. How do you handle context window limits when your subagents are working on larger codebases? That's been my main pain point with CLI agents — they burn through tokens fast on big repos even with good .clinerules or AGENTS.md scoping.
Frankly I have not seen subagents to ever overflow context, that's not that easy, did multiple attempts and still exploring long-horizon subagents orchestration: github.com/maxim-saplin/hyperlink_...
So far implementations I saw (runSubagent tool in GH and task in OpenCode) do simple request/response disposable dialogs where an agent sessions is started and than the main agent spinning the subagent only cares about the final result.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Interesting comparison! I hit the same token limit wall with Cursor and ended up going a completely different direction - CLI-based agents (Claude Code) orchestrating sub-agents for parallel tasks instead of relying on IDE integrations. The biggest win was automating the workflow around coding: draft generation, deployment verification, health checks, all chained together. Went from manually doing everything to 80+ automation scripts in a week. Curious if you have tried any non-IDE approaches? The Plan Mode frustration you described is exactly why I moved away from IDE-embedded AI - too many layers between intent and execution.
I use OpenCode quite often, even created a skill to launch resumae subagents powered by OpenCode. CLI tools are great if you want to build your own pipelines for sure. In terms of general use, see no major difference in capability, be it GUI or TUI. Question of preference and token availability
Good point about GUI vs TUI being mostly preference — I agree there's no fundamental capability gap anymore. OpenCode looks interesting, hadn't seen the resumable subagent pattern before. How do you handle context window limits when your subagents are working on larger codebases? That's been my main pain point with CLI agents — they burn through tokens fast on big repos even with good .clinerules or AGENTS.md scoping.
Frankly I have not seen subagents to ever overflow context, that's not that easy, did multiple attempts and still exploring long-horizon subagents orchestration: github.com/maxim-saplin/hyperlink_...
So far implementations I saw (
runSubagenttool in GH andtaskin OpenCode) do simple request/response disposable dialogs where an agent sessions is started and than the main agent spinning the subagent only cares about the final result.