Skip to main content
AI Choice Engine

Agentic harness comparison

Claude Code vs Antigravity

Compared on where each one runs, which editors it supports, how autonomous it is, and how it bills — the four things that actually decide Claude Code vs Antigravity. Rankings reflect fit and trade-offs, not a single universal winner; partner links, when present, do not replace that methodology.

Details last verified September 26, 2026

Anthropic

Claude Code

Terminal, IDE plugins, desktop, and browser · Agentic

vs

Google

Antigravity

Own IDE, CLI, and IDE extensions · Agentic

AI harness specification comparison
SpecificationClaude CodeAntigravity
VendorAnthropicGoogle
Runs inTerminal, IDE plugins, desktop, and browserOwn IDE, CLI, and IDE extensions
Editor supportTerminal CLI, VS Code / Cursor, JetBrains, Desktop app, claude.ai/codeAntigravity IDE, VS Code, JetBrains, Zed, Visual Studio 2026, Antigravity CLI, Desktop app
AutonomyAgenticAgentic
Pricing modelHybridHybrid
Requires changing editorWinner: NoYes

Benchmark scores carry the month they were measured. Values we could not confirm are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.

AgenticHybrid

Claude Code

Anthropic's agentic coding tool that runs in the terminal, IDE plugins, a desktop app, and the browser at claude.ai/code, all sharing one config and one subscription. It is billed either through a Claude plan (Pro / Max / Team / Enterprise) or via Anthropic Console / API pay-as-you-go.

Best for

  • Multi-file refactors
  • Migrations
  • Delegated engineering tasks

Watch out

Claude Code is included in every paid Claude plan (Free does not include it) and shares the plan's usage allowance with Claude chat; an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY can bill API credits instead. Pro is $20/mo (about $17/mo annual), Max 5x $100/mo, Max 20x $200/mo; Team Standard is $25/seat/mo ($20 annual) and Team Premium $125/seat/mo ($100 annual), while Enterprise is $20/seat plus API-rate usage (sources: claude.com/pricing; support.claude.com help center; re-checked 2026-09-26). Claude Code's `default` model is now Claude Opus 5.5 (launched 2026-09-22) on Pro, Max, Team, Enterprise and the Anthropic API — it needs v2.1.280 or later (code.claude.com/docs/en/model-config). Neither Fable model is the account default on any plan; the `fable` alias resolves to Claude Fable 5.1 (cache reads $0.25/MTok). On Pro, Fable bills from usage credits; on Max it counts at 50% of weekly limits. Limits reset on a rolling 5-hour window plus a weekly cap, so size heavy agent loops against that, not a flat monthly message count.

AgenticHybrid

Antigravity

Google's agent-first IDE built natively around Gemini, with IDE extensions for VS Code/JetBrains/Zed, Antigravity CLI (Google's replacement for consumer Gemini CLI since 2026-06-18), a desktop app, and coordinated multi-agent workspaces — generally available with a $0 Individual plan, and bundled into Gemini Enterprise.

Best for

  • Agent-first workflows
  • Individuals moving off consumer Gemini CLI (Antigravity CLI)
  • Multi-agent coordination across editor + terminal + browser

Watch out

Generally Available (verified 2026-09-26, antigravity.google/pricing): the Individual plan is $0 with Gemini 3.8/3.7/3.6 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Claude Sonnet and Opus 4.6 and gpt-oss-120b under basic weekly limits; Google AI Pro and Ultra add higher limits and a flexible credit pool; an organisation plan comes through Google Cloud and Gemini Enterprise (bundled into Gemini Enterprise Standard/Plus since 2026-08-20). Antigravity CLI (command `agy`) is Google's official successor to consumer Gemini CLI: written in Go, it runs multiple agents, uses plugins in place of extensions, runs on macOS, Linux and Windows, and signs in through the browser (a Gemini API key works only with `modelProvider` set to gemini in settings.json) (antigravity.google/docs/cli and the developers.googleblog.com transition post). Gemini 3.8 Flash rolled out across Antigravity surfaces around 2026-09-01. Model-agnostic routing to Claude/GPT-OSS also available. One secondary source cites 76.2% SWE-bench Verified — unconfirmed by Google, treat as indicative. Adopting the IDE means a tool switch; extensions soften that for VS Code/JetBrains/Zed users.

Common questions

Claude Code vs Antigravity

Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.

Do I have to change editor to use Claude Code or Antigravity?
Antigravity requires moving to its own environment, while Claude Code runs in Terminal CLI, VS Code / Cursor, JetBrains, Desktop app, claude.ai/code. For a team that has not standardised on one editor, that difference usually outweighs any capability gap.
How are Claude Code and Antigravity priced?
Both are hybrid. The headline seat or plan price is not the heavy-agent bill — included credits, shared pools, and overages dominate once you loop agents hard. Estimate cost per successful task and set spend caps.
Is Claude Code or Antigravity better for large refactors?
Both are agentic, so neither has a structural advantage on delegated work. Judge them on editor fit and price instead.
Should I run Claude Code and Antigravity together?
Often yes as a hybrid stack rather than forcing one winner. Keep the stronger in-editor assistant for daily tab/chat work and the more autonomous surface for longer delegated tasks, then standardise on a portable repo rules file so project memory survives switching. Pilot both on the same practice repository before consolidating seats.
Will my project rules transfer between Claude Code and Antigravity?
Usually not automatically. Cursor rules, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, and extension-specific configs are different conventions. Keep one source of truth in the repository (commonly AGENTS.md) and copy or link into each tool’s native format so switching does not wipe months of project teaching.
Does Claude Code require a Max plan?
No. Claude Pro includes Claude Code with a shared usage pool alongside Claude chat. Max raises limits; Free Claude.ai chat does not include Claude Code. An ANTHROPIC_API_KEY can bill Console/API instead of the subscription pool.
Do coding agents replace code review?
No. Agents can draft patches faster, but they do not remove the need for human review of plans, tool calls, permissions, diffs, tests, and rollback paths. Treat autonomy as a reason for stronger review, not less — see the coding assistant rollout guide at /ai-harnesses/guides/coding-assistant-rollout-guide.
Should we harden MCP before rolling out a coding agent?
Yes for any agent that can install MCP servers or run tools. Maintain a short allowlist, review each server’s folder and network access before install, fail closed on unknown tools, and log tool calls. .cursorignore and similar rules do not block MCP or shell access once a command is approved.

Next step

Which one fits

Autonomy and editor constraints decide this far more reliably than a benchmark score.

If most of your week is small, frequent edits, an assistive workflow beats delegation and an agentic harness sits idle while billing. If you regularly hand over work spanning many files, the reverse is true.

Where one tool requires changing editor and the other does not, that difference usually outweighs any capability gap across a team — rollouts fail on adoption, not capability.

“Open vendor” links use a first-party redirect for click counting. They are not commissionable partner placements unless a programme is active for that vendor. Affiliate disclosure.