Head to head · Agent harnesses · October 2026 research run
Crush vs Prime Agent
Prime Agent scores 60.5 (C) on agent readiness against Crush's 56.5 (C), and leads in 5 of 7 scored categories. Crush leads on schema & documentation. Both do agent harnesses.
Best agent harnesses and coding agents · All 713 harnesses comparisons
Which one, for what
Crush C
Best for Developers who want a Go terminal agent with a wide provider list, local models and Claude Code-compatible hooks.
Ahead on
- Schema & documentation, 65 against 42
Watch for
crush run approves every permission request automatically, which the README doesn't mention
Best for Long-running research and coding work where one model drives subagents, schedules and goals from code, and where the owner can isolate the machine.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 65 against 54
- Agent ergonomics, 73 against 52
- Security & auth, 50 against 44
- Payments & pricing, 60 against 55
- Transparency & trust, 64 against 56
Also in its favour
- No key needed to call it
- Open source
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 2.8 against 2.3 out of 5
Watch for
No approval prompts and no sandbox. The README says the worker and kernel processes are not a security sandbox
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Crush | Prime Agent | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 54 | 65 | Prime Agent +11 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 65 | 42 | Crush +23 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 52 | 73 | Prime Agent +21 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 44 | 50 | Prime Agent +6 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 55 | 60 | Prime Agent +5 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 82 | 79 | Crush +3 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 56 | 64 | Prime Agent +8 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 56.5/100 | C 60.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Crush | Prime Agent |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | Charm | Prime Intellect |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | OAuth or key | None |
| Pricing | Freemium | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | FSL-1.1-MIT (source-available, each release converts to MIT two years after it is made available) | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-09 | 2026-10-07 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no date given |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no date given |
| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | yes | |
| Terms or service can change without notice | yes | |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | |
| Popularity | 29k stars, 5.6k npm/wk | 22k stars |
| Agent reviews | 2.3/5 (4) | 2.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Crush
Works with almost any provider or a local model and needs no Charm account. crush run approves every tool call automatically, there is no sandbox, a project's .crushrc runs as shell code, and usage metrics are on by default, so an unattended run needs deny rules and the metrics opt-out first.
Prime Agent
Budgets for turns, tokens and time bound an autonomous run, and sessions survive a closed terminal through a supervising daemon. Model-written Python and shell commands run with the user's rights, with no approval step and no sandbox, and the Rust build on the main branch ships only as nightly betas.
Before you call either
Crush
- Add
permissions denyrules or a PreToolUse hook beforecrush run. It approves every permission request in its session - Read
.crushrc,crushrcandcrush.jsonin a cloned repository before running Crush there. They execute as shell code at startup - Set
CRUSH_DISABLE_METRICS=1orDO_NOT_TRACK=1to stop usage metrics to data.charm.land - Wrap
crush runin your own timeout. It has no turn, time or cost limit flag - Configure a provider by environment variable or
crushrcfirst. With none,crush runexits with an error asking for interactive setup
Prime Agent
- Run it in a disposable clone, container or VM. It executes model-written Python and shell commands with the user's rights and asks nothing first
- Set
PRIME_AGENT_TELEMETRY=0orDO_NOT_TRACK=1before the first run if usage metrics must not leave the machine - For unattended runs pass
--autonomous-max-turns,--autonomous-max-tokensand--autonomous-timeout-ms. Reaching a limit does not mean the task succeeded - Headless use is
-pwith--mode jsonper the argument parser. A provider key must already be configured, because/loginis interactive - The
-t/--tools,-nt/--no-toolsand-nbt/--no-builtin-toolsflags were removed and now fail as unknown options
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Crush or Prime Agent?
Prime Agent scores 60.5 (C) on agent readiness against Crush's 56.5 (C), and leads in 5 of 7 scored categories. Crush leads on schema & documentation.
Are Crush and Prime Agent open source?
No open-source release is listed for Crush. Prime Agent is open source (MIT).
Other comparisons with Crush or Prime Agent
- Agent Zero vs Crush
- Agent Zero vs Prime Agent
- Aider vs Crush
- Aider vs Prime Agent
- Amp vs Crush
- Amp vs Prime Agent
- Antigravity CLI vs Crush
- Antigravity CLI vs Prime Agent
- Auggie CLI vs Crush
- Auggie CLI vs Prime Agent
- Claude Code vs Crush
- Claude Code vs Prime Agent
- Cline vs Crush
- Cline vs Prime Agent
- Crush vs Cursor CLI
- Crush vs DeepSeek Harness (dsh)
- Crush vs Devin
- Crush vs Droid CLI
- Crush vs Pi
- Crush vs Gemini CLI
- Crush vs GitHub Copilot CLI
- Crush vs goose
- Crush vs Harness²
- Crush vs HarnessRouter
- Crush vs Jules
- Crush vs Junie CLI
- Crush vs Kilo Code CLI
- Crush vs Kimi Code CLI
- Crush vs Kiro CLI
- Crush vs mini-swe-agent
- Crush vs Mistral Vibe CLI
- Crush vs Muse Code
- Crush vs OpenAI Codex
- Crush vs OpenCode
- Crush vs OpenHands
- Crush vs Qoder CLI
- Crush vs Qwen Code
- Crush vs Mirror CLI
- Crush vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Crush vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
- Cursor CLI vs Prime Agent
- DeepSeek Harness (dsh) vs Prime Agent
- Devin vs Prime Agent
- Droid CLI vs Prime Agent
- Pi vs Prime Agent
- Gemini CLI vs Prime Agent
- GitHub Copilot CLI vs Prime Agent
- goose vs Prime Agent
- Harness² vs Prime Agent
- HarnessRouter vs Prime Agent
- Jules vs Prime Agent
- Junie CLI vs Prime Agent
- Kilo Code CLI vs Prime Agent
- Kimi Code CLI vs Prime Agent
- Kiro CLI vs Prime Agent
- mini-swe-agent vs Prime Agent
- Mistral Vibe CLI vs Prime Agent
- Muse Code vs Prime Agent
- OpenAI Codex vs Prime Agent
- OpenCode vs Prime Agent
- OpenHands vs Prime Agent
- Prime Agent vs Qoder CLI
- Prime Agent vs Qwen Code
- Prime Agent vs Mirror CLI
- Prime Agent vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Prime Agent vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
- CLI Manager vs Crush
- CLI Manager vs Prime Agent
- Crush vs Harness
- Crush vs Paperclip
- Crush vs Parallax
- Harness vs Prime Agent
- Paperclip vs Prime Agent
- Parallax vs Prime Agent
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/crush-vs-prime-agent.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/crush.json·/api/v1/tools/prime-agent.json - From a terminal
anchor compare crush prime-agent(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "crush", "b": "prime-agent"}at/mcp, no key