ECC
ECC is an open-source agent harness operating layer that gives Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode and Kimi shared skills, memory,
ECC Pro is worth the $19/active-developer-seat/month once private-repo auditing and AgentShield scanning are catching real problems in internal code — the yearly toggle knocks roughly 17% off. Solo devs in a single harness should stay on the free MIT toolkit plus the public-repo App tier (10 analyses/month, 200 commits per run). Lighter single-editor copilots such as Aider and Continue cost less, but neither spans multiple harnesses.
Verified 3d ago · liveness 80/100 · cite: rightaichoice.com/tools/ecc
- Teams running two or more coding agents who need shared conventions and policy
- Engineering orgs that want automated repo-history guidance through the GitHub App
- Security-minded platforms auditing agent permissions, hooks and MCP connections
- Developers who want agent handoffs and project memory to survive switching harnesses
- Solo developers in a single harness and a single repo — the coordination overhead won't pay back
- Teams standardized on GitLab, Bitbucket or other non-GitHub source control for the hosted App path
- Organizations that need a fully hosted cloud platform with no local CLI or MCP setup
We scan live Reddit threads, YouTube comments, X posts, G2 reviews and other communities — and hand you an honest verdict in under a minute.
- Honest verdict, not marketing
- Real pros & cons from real users
- Attributed quotes with receipts
3 free scans · no card needed
Skip ECC if you run a single coding agent in a single repository — the install profiles, memory handoffs and per-seat Pro billing buy you coordination you aren't using yet.
Pro is billed per active developer seat, so a team where only two people touch agents still pays the pooled-seat rate when usage spreads.
$0 for the OSS toolkit and public-repo GitHub App work; $19 per active developer seat per month for Pro, about 17% cheaper billed yearly; Enterprise is a scoped contract. It undercuts per-token agent platforms for governance work but costs more than single-editor copilots like Aider or Continue, because you're paying per developer seat for cross-harness policy rather than per completion.
In short
ECC — ECC is an open-source agent harness operating layer that gives Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode and Kimi shared skills, memory,. Best for Teams running two or more coding agents who need shared conventions and policy, Engineering orgs that want automated repo-history guidance through the GitHub App, Security-minded platforms auditing agent permissions, hooks and MCP connections. Free to start; paid plans from $19/user/mo.
What's new in ECC
Checked 2 days agoAcross the latest 4 updates: 1 feature update, 1 launch, 1 pricing change and 1 changelog entry.
Continuous learning, team skill sync, and opt-in usage insight
Session-history learning turns corrections, error-to-fix sequences and repeated workflows into confidence-scored instincts, with auto-pruning of idle ones. A team skill registry syncs every seat to the current version, and telemetry is opt-in with explicit consent scopes.
2.0.0 stable — the agent harness operating system
The skill catalog and orch-* orchestrator family ship in the stable release, along with a control-pane substrate with session adapters and MCP inventory, a worktree-lifecycle service, and the Discord community launch.
GitHub App pricing aligned to the commercialization plan
Public repos stay free while Pro centers on active-seat billing, pooled usage and metered overage. Checkout and onboarding align with the GitHub App rollout path, and Enterprise positioning emphasizes governance and procurement.
Website repositioned around the full ECC system
Landing, pricing, security and platforms copy now reflect the real ECC stack instead of stale snapshots, with community proof showing current stars, contributors and npm usage.
What people actually say about ECC — is it worth it?
We scanned public community sources for ECC on Sep 14, 2026 and could not establish that the discussion we found is about this tool rather than something else sharing its name. Only 2 of the posts we fetched could be positively tied to ECC. Rather than publish a sentiment score built on the wrong subject, we publish nothing here and re-run the scan.
Viability Score
How well maintained and how widely used is ECC? Built from what the vendor actually publishes (docs, changelog, tutorials, integrations, pricing), whether the site is live, and how much real users discuss it. How we calculate this
Last calculated: October 2026
How we score →Key Features
- 261 MIT-licensed skills for coding agents
- 64 specialized agents and 84 workflow commands
- AgentShield scanner for permissions, hooks, secrets and MCP connections
- Session-history learning: corrections and error-to-fix sequences become confidence-scored instincts
- Auto-pruning of idle instincts with a reviewable dry-run plan
- Team skill registry with versioned checksum sync across seats at session start
- GitHub App converts repo history into reusable skills and issue-comment-triggered PRs
- PR-triggered config audits and large-push auto-triggers
- Plan Canvas for annotating plans in the browser and routing feedback to the agent
- Control Pane local view of sessions, worktrees and overlapping work
- Unified Memory handoffs and project-context search between harnesses via CLI and MCP
- orch-* orchestrator family, session adapters and MCP inventory (ECC 2.0.0)
- Cross-harness support for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode and Kimi Code
- Install profiles: core, developer, security, research
- Opt-in usage telemetry with explicit consent scopes
About ECC
ECC (Everything Claude Code) is an MIT-licensed toolkit that installs underneath your coding agent instead of replacing it. Drop it into Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode or Kimi Code and every harness works from the same skills catalog, memory store, planning surface and security checks — so a handoff written in Codex can be read back from Claude. The repo ships hundreds of skills, agents and commands, split into install profiles (core, developer, security, research) so a solo dev can keep the footprint tight while a platform team goes wide. Four surfaces carry most of the weight. AgentShield inspects configurations, permissions, hooks and MCP connections for exposed secrets and risky grants. Plan Canvas lets you annotate a plan in the browser and push feedback back to the agent. Unified Memory saves a handoff and reads it from another harness through the CLI and MCP. Control Pane gives a local operator view across sessions, worktrees and overlapping work. Recent releases pushed it well past a prompt pack. The 2.0.0 stable (June 2026) added the orch-* orchestrator family, a control-pane substrate with session adapters and MCP inventory, and a worktree-lifecycle service. Continuous learning (July 2026) turns corrections, error-to-fix sequences and repeated workflows from session history into confidence-scored instincts, prunes idle ones with a reviewable dry-run, and syncs a versioned skill registry to every seat at session start. The GitHub App is the hosted side: connect a private repo and it converts project history into reviewable guidance, opening issue-comment-triggered PRs you approve or reject. It is built for developers and platform teams already running agents who are tired of each tool keeping its own rules and its own blind spots. If you run one agent in one repo, the coordination overhead is probably more than you need.
Behind the Verdict
The pitch sounds like plumbing, and that is exactly the point. Most agent pain is not model quality — it is that Claude Code, Codex and Cursor each keep their own rules, their own context and their own blind spots. ECC bets that the fix is a thin shared layer rather than one more agent to add to the pile. That bet holds up when you are actually rotating between harnesses. Where it pays off fast: an engineer writes a handoff in Codex, a reviewer picks it up in Claude, and Unified Memory carries the thread. AgentShield flags a hook or MCP grant someone sneaked into a config. On a platform team running two or more agents across a fleet of repos, those two things alone justify the seat cost. Continuous learning is the piece I would watch hardest. Turning corrections and error-to-fix sequences into confidence-scored instincts is genuinely useful, and the reviewable dry-run for pruning is the right call — an agent that silently rewrites its own habits is a liability, not a feature. The versioned skill registry matters just as much for teams, since drift between seats is the usual failure mode of shared agent config. The GitHub App is the honest commercial center. Public repos stay free; Pro is where private repos, PR-triggered config audits, large-push auto-triggers and AgentShield-backed scanning kick in. Pooled seat usage with metered overage means a spiky month will not brick the install, though heavy teams should model the overage before standardizing. Where it bites. Everything runs local — CLI, MCP, adapters — so if you want a fully hosted cloud control plane with no setup, this is not that. The hosted App path assumes GitHub; GitLab and Bitbucket shops get the OSS half only. And if you are one developer in one editor, install profiles and orchestrators are
Researching ECC? Get your full AI stack in 60 seconds.
Free, no signup — tell us your goal and get tools matched to your budget & existing stack.
Real-world workflow fit
Concrete scenarios for the personas ECC actually fits — and what changes day-one when you adopt it.
Installs ECC on Claude Code and Codex with the security profile, connects the private repo through the GitHub App, and turns on PR-triggered config audits.
Outcome: AgentShield flags an MCP connection exposing a token and the fix lands as a reviewable PR instead of a Slack thread.
Writes a Unified Memory handoff from Codex with 'ecc memory handoff --from codex --target claude' and resumes the rollout in Claude Code.
Outcome: The next agent picks up the thread with project context intact rather than re-deriving it from the diff.
Publishes the team's reviewed skills to the central registry so every seat converges on the current version at session start.
Outcome: New hires inherit the same commands and checks on day one without a git sync step.
Use Cases
- Scan repositories for risky configurations with AgentShield before merging a PR.
- Convert repository history into reusable skills and defaults for your coding agents.
- Automate PR-triggered config audits across private repos with the GitHub App.
- Hand off an in-progress task from Codex to Claude Code via Unified Memory.
- Keep every developer seat on the same published skill version without touching git.
- See overlapping agent work across worktrees in Control Pane before it collides.
- Annotate a plan in the browser and send feedback back to the agent in place.
- Promote recurring lessons from session history into confidence-scored instincts.
Limitations
- The ECC OSS toolkit is MIT-licensed and stays free, while the GitHub App free tier covers public repos only with 10 analyses per month and 200 commits per run.
- Pro is $19 per seat per month with private repo analysis, PR-triggered audits, AgentShield-backed scanning, 50 analyses per active developer seat pooled on the installation, 1,000 commits per run and optional metered overage.
- Enterprise adds unlimited analyses, 5,000 commits per run, custom rules and policy packs, SSO-ready governance and audit log surfaces, dedicated onboarding and an SLA.
- Acquisition metrics such as stars, forks, clone events and skill installs are self-reported counters that do not establish completed installs or unique developers.
as of 2026-10-08
Verification history
We have re-verified ECC 10 times since . Each pass re-reads the vendor's own pages and re-checks every listed field against that evidence; passes where nothing had changed are marked as such.
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
- — re-verified summary, description, our verdict, our analysis, pricing model, pricing tiers, features, integrations, who it suits, who should skip it
Showing the 6 most recent of 10 verification passes.
Free to cite with attribution — this page re-verifies continuously.
12-month cost
Project the real annual outlay, including the implied monthly cost when only an annual tier is published.
Vendor list price only. Add-on usage, seat overages, and contract minimums are surfaced under Hidden costs & gotchas.
Plans compared
For each published ECC tier: who it actually fits, and what it adds vs. the previous tier. Cross-reference the cost calculator above for projected annual outlay.
Free
$0/mo
Ideal for
Solo developers and OSS maintainers who want the MIT-licensed toolkit plus public-repo analysis without a billing setup.
What this tier adds
Starting tier: free OSS skills, agents and commands, 10 analyses per month, 200 commits per run, issue-comment-triggered PRs and community support.
Pro
$19/seat/mo
Ideal for
Small teams and platform groups putting ECC on private internal repos with recurring PR-triggered audits.
What this tier adds
Adds private repo analysis, PR-triggered config audits, AgentShield-backed scanning, large-push auto-triggers, 50 pooled analyses per active seat, 1,000 commits per run and self-serve billing.
Enterprise
Custom
Ideal for
Organizations running a procurement, governance and SSO review before a company-wide agent rollout.
What this tier adds
Adds unlimited analyses, 5,000 commits per run, custom rules and policy packs, SSO and audit logs, dedicated onboarding and an SLA.
Where the pricing makes sense
The company stage and team size where ECC's pricing actually pencils out — and where peers do it cheaper.
$0 for the OSS toolkit and public-repo GitHub App work; $19 per active developer seat per month for Pro, about 17% cheaper billed yearly; Enterprise is a scoped contract. It undercuts per-token agent platforms for governance work but costs more than single-editor copilots like Aider or Continue, because you're paying per developer seat for cross-harness policy rather than per completion.
Setup time & first value
How long it actually takes to get something useful out of ECC — broken out by persona, not the marketing-page minute.
For a solo developer, the guided install (npx ecc-universal install --guided) into Claude Code, Codex or Kimi Code is a minutes-scale job with the core profile. A team rollout is longer: add adapter setup for Cursor and OpenCode, connect the GitHub App for repo analysis, and budget a session or two before PR-triggered audits and pooled seats are tuned. Enterprise rollout with policy packs and SSO
Switching to or from ECC
How to bring data in from common predecessors and how to get it back out — written for the switcher, not the buyer.
- →From a single-harness setup: install ECC with the core profile in your existing agent and keep your current prompts as skills.
- →From a repo-history prompt collection: connect the GitHub App and let it propose guidance from past commits before you port anything by hand.
- →From manual agent handoffs: move your notes into 'ecc memory handoff' and read them from the target harness through MCP.
- →From per-developer rules files: publish reviewed skills to the team registry so every seat syncs the same version.
- →From ad-hoc security review: enable AgentShield in the security profile and route findings through PR-triggered audits.
- ↗To a single-editor copilot: copy your ECC skills back into the agent's native prompt or rules files and drop MCP setup.
- ↗To another governance layer: export the skill catalog and instincts, since the OSS layer is MIT-licensed and forkable.
- ↗To a non-GitHub App path: keep the free OSS toolkit on GitLab or Bitbucket but lose hosted repo analysis and PR automation.
- ↗To manual review: disable auto-triggers and keep AgentShield as a local scan only.
Integrations
Resources & Guides
Tutorials & Learning
YouTube returned 6 videos for “ECC”, and we withheld 6: 6 could not be judged, because “ECC” is a single word that other videos use for other things. We are showing none, because we could not prove any of them are about ECC.
Official links
Tools that pair well with ECC
Common stack mates teams adopt alongside ECC, with the specific reason each pairing earns its keep.
Continue
Open-source AI coding agent for VS Code and JetBrains — free to fork since Cursor acquired Continue in January 2026.
Claude
Claude is Anthropic's AI assistant for long-document analysis, agentic coding, and multi-step work inside one chat and Cowork surface.
Imbue
Imbue builds inspectable coding-agent tools, from mngr's parallel agent runner to Latchkey's HTTP permissions
Featured Head-to-Head Comparisons
Ecc vs Presto Voice
Presto Voice and ECC serve entirely different domains – drive-thru automation vs. development agent orchestration. Choose Presto Voice if you run a QSR chain and need proven voice AI to boost revenue and efficiency. Pick ECC if you're a developer or team using Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or OpenCode and want to govern, optimize, and secure your agent workflows with an open, extensible system.
Ecc vs Locus Robotics
Locus Robotics and ECC serve completely different domains—warehouse automation vs. developer tooling. Choose Locus if you need proven AMRs to boost fulfillment productivity by 2-3x; choose ECC if you orchestrate coding agents and need cross-harness security/skills. No overlap in use cases.
Ecc vs Truleo
Truleo and ECC serve completely different domains—law enforcement intelligence vs. developer agent orchestration. Choose Truleo if you run a police department needing to connect siloed data and automate report writing (40→7 min). Choose ECC if you manage coding agents across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, or OpenCode and want security, skills, and governance. No overlap in audience or use case.
Alternatives to ECC
View all
Frequently Asked Questions
Best-of guides
Used ECC? Help shape our editorial sentiment research.