Software factory for Claude Code compared

A software factory for Claude Code built with Tares fits when you want a crew of sessions that keeps working across restarts, and a record of the plan, the reviews and your decisions that outlives every session. If you only need help inside one session, subagents or a single worktree are lighter, and if you want an agent you hand a whole task to, Devin or OpenHands are closer to that. This page compares them on the same seven questions.

How they compare

On a narrow screen, scroll the table sideways to see every column.

	Tares	Claude Code subagents	Claude Code agent teams	OpenHands	Devin	Hand-run worktrees
Who plans	You, with Claude Code in `/tares:spec`, which interviews you and has a second model attack the plan. The plan is saved as a spec, milestones and tickets.	Claude delegates by task description, or you name a subagent.	A lead session creates the shared task list and assigns tasks.	A person, or automations you configure that triage issues and set acceptance criteria.	You, by splitting work into sub-tasks, or Devin, which can break down large tasks itself.	You, per session.
Who reviews	A reviewer session checks every pull request to a fixed bar and posts its verdict. Builders merge only after that verdict and green CI.	No built-in reviewer. The main conversation reads each subagent’s summary, and you can define a reviewer subagent.	No dedicated reviewer role. Examples use teammates as reviewers, and optional hooks can block a task from completing.	Optional: an experimental Critic, a `/goal` judge, and an AI pull request review automation.	Devin Review analyzes pull requests, and you keep approval.	Not documented as a step. The docs tip is to review Claude’s pull request yourself.
What survives a restart	The plan, tickets, reviews and your answers stay on Tares. A watch brings back stopped sessions, and they carry on from the record.	Transcripts persist in the session, and you resume the same session to resume a subagent.	Partly. The task list persists, but `/resume` does not restore in-process teammates.	The SDK restores a conversation when you reuse its conversation ID and persistence directory. The CLI can resume saved history.	Memory notes persist across sessions. Session logs stay in the web app, and you can resume a session.	Sessions are saved locally. `--resume` returns a session to its worktree.
Where the record lives	On Tares, local or Tares Cloud, plus the pull requests on GitHub.	Transcript files under `~/.claude/projects`.	Task list files under `~/.claude/tasks`, which persist. The team config under `~/.claude/teams` is removed when the session ends.	Local conversation directories, or GitHub issues, labels, reviews and statuses in its issue-to-pull-request use case.	Hosted session logs, the review page, and pull request comments.	Not documented as a plan or review record. Session transcripts remain, and the branch if you keep the worktree.
Runs on your machine	Yes. The crew runs on your machine on your Claude Code login.	Yes.	Yes.	Both: local, Docker or a hosted cloud.	Both: a hosted web app, and a CLI that runs locally.	Yes.
Cost model	Your Claude Code login and plan, with no separate model key. The Codex check is optional.	Your Claude usage limits.	Your Claude usage, significantly more than a single session.	Your LLM usage. Cloud billing is not documented.	Plans with included quota and on-demand credits. Enterprise is billed by usage.	Your Claude usage, by implication. Not stated on the worktrees page.
What you babysit	Questions from the orchestrator, one at a time, each with a recommendation. You can require your yes before every merge.	Permission prompts, and restating any rule that must reach a subagent, since it starts without your conversation history.	Permission prompts that bubble up to the lead, task status that can lag, and unattended runs that waste effort.	Tokens, agent profiles and automations, issues with acceptance criteria, and pausing the schedule.	Prompts with completion criteria, reviewing output, and correcting Devin mid-session.	Each worktree’s setup, exit prompts, and leftover worktrees.

Agent teams are experimental and off by default. The Tares column describes what Tares does today, from its factory guide.

When something else fits better

Claude Code subagents. If the job fits inside one session, such as a research question, a focused review or a refactor you drive yourself, subagents are the least setup. You give up a plan that survives the session and an independent review of every pull request.
Claude Code agent teams. If you want several sessions to debate a problem or split a feature while you watch, agent teams are built into Claude Code and need no extra install. They are experimental, and /resume does not restore in-process teammates, so they suit work you finish in one sitting.
OpenHands. If you want an open-source agent that works with the model of your choice, in a sandbox, or wired to your issue tracker through automations, OpenHands is the better fit. You configure the planning and review pieces yourself.
Devin. If you want a hosted agent you hand a task to, with its own review product and no crew to run on your machine, Devin is the better fit. You pay for it as a service and the record lives in its cloud.
Hand-run worktrees. If you run two or three Claude Code sessions yourself and are happy to be the planner and the reviewer, worktrees need nothing beyond Claude Code. The cost is that you are the glue, and nothing records the plan or the decisions.

Sources

Claude Code subagents:

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/sub-agents

Claude Code agent teams:

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/agent-teams

Hand-run worktrees:

OpenHands:

Devin:

Tares: