defract vs claude code agent teams

agent teams run claude in parallel.
defract runs your process on top.

claude code's agent teams are the native floor: free, built-in, parallel agents coordinating from your terminal. defract runs on the same claude code — and adds the part the terminal doesn't: an opinionated lifecycle with gates, a visual design stage, and a desktop app where you review intent per phase instead of driving every step yourself.

open beta · macos · runs on your own claude code

defract runs on claude code — it doesn't replace it. agent teams are claude code's own way to run several agents in parallel, each in its own git worktree, coordinating through a shared task list from the terminal. that's a real, free capability, and defract uses the same engine underneath. the question this page answers isn't "which runner" — it's whether you want to drive the agents yourself, or have a process drive them for you.

what defract adds on top

three things the terminal doesn't give you.
every one of them takes load off your head.

01

a process, not a prompt you steer

with agent teams you direct the work in natural language — you decide the stages, the order, and when something's done. defract decides the shape so you don't have to.

scope → design → architecture → implementation → review → release, with a gate at each. the agents do the work between gates; you weigh in at them. the structure lives in the tool instead of in your head and your prompts.

02

a desktop app, and a visual design stage

agent teams are terminal-first — split panes, one per agent. defract gives you a surface built for reviewing, not just watching.

per-phase review

you review intent and shape on a purpose-built ui for each stage — scope, design, architecture — not by scrolling diffs across terminal panes.

design as a stage

a gated visual design step in the lifecycle: agent-produced, you approve it, it drives implementation. not a separate tool you hand off to.

03

review is engineered, gates are enforced

agent teams give you the raw hooks; you write the enforcement. defract ships the gates.

types, lint and tests gate every merge, plus review agents for architecture, security and ux — code only progresses once it's signed off. the same coordination agent teams expose as scripting, defract gives you as a process out of the box.

side by side

the honest comparison.

defract claude code agent teams
what it is an opinionated lifecycle app built on claude code claude code's native multi-agent mode
structure enforced lifecycle: scope → design → architecture → implementation → review → release you coordinate agents yourself, in natural language
interface desktop app with per-phase review uis terminal-first (split panes per agent)
design a gated visual design stage in the lifecycle not built in
review & gates agents review agents; merge gated on sign-off, out of the box hooks you script yourself
parallel git worktrees yes parity yes (native)
engine your claude code (codex · gemini · opencode in v1) claude code (native)
cost app in open beta; bring your own claude (pay anthropic directly) included with claude code
platform macos (windows · linux in v1) wherever claude code runs (terminal)

where agent teams win — and they do

we'll be straight: agent teams are free, native, and zero-install — they're already in the claude code you run, the git-worktree isolation is built in, and anthropic ships improvements on a fast cadence. if you live in the terminal, want parallel agents you drive yourself, and don't want another app in the loop, the native floor is a good floor. start there.

defract is for the next step: when running the agents isn't the hard part anymore — keeping a multi-stage build coherent, reviewable, and shipped is. we add the process and the surface on top of the same engine. not a replacement for claude code; a way to run your process through it.

keep the engine. add the process.

download the open beta. it runs on the same claude code you already use.