Does running agents in parallel cost more tokens?

Yes — more concurrent agents means more concurrent token spend. The win is wall-clock time, not cost, so still cap each loop and review before merge.

Guides/Tools

Worktree Orchestrators Compared

Short answer

Worktree orchestrators run several coding agents at once, each in an isolated git worktree, so parallel work does not collide. They differ in supported agents, diff/review UX, merge flow, and license.

Why it matters

Running agents in parallel is a token-aware, time-saving pattern — but only if each agent is isolated and you review before merge. The license matters too: a GPL tool has different obligations than an MIT one.

Open-source worktree / parallel orchestrators

Open-source worktree / parallel orchestrators
Tool	Worktrees	Agents	Review / diff	License
crystal	Yes	Claude Code, Codex	Compare approaches	MIT (deprecated)
Nimbalyst	One-click	Claude Code, Codex (+alpha)	Inline diff	MIT
parallel-code	Yes	Claude Code, Codex, Gemini, Copilot	Diff + inline comments	MIT
vibe-kanban	Branch + dev server	10+ agents	Diff + comments, PRs	Apache-2.0
tutti	Yes	Claude Code, Codex, Aider	Typed artifacts	MIT
cmux	Parallel + SSH	Many agents	In-app browser, PR status	GPL-3.0

6 of 6 rows

How to choose

01Claude Code + Codex side by side, with diff review?parallel-code or Nimbalyst
02A config-driven pipeline with typed hand-off between steps?tutti
03A kanban board spanning 10+ agents?vibe-kanban
04Remote / SSH workspaces with an in-app browser?cmux (note: GPL-3.0)

Practical checklist

Confirm each agent runs in its own git worktree
Check which coding agents it supports (Claude Code, Codex, others)
Prefer tools with inline diff review before merge
Keep a human merge gate — avoid one-click auto-merge without review
Check the license before commercial use (MIT vs Apache-2.0 vs GPL-3.0)

Example

For Claude Code + Codex side by side, parallel-code and Nimbalyst both isolate each task in a worktree with inline diff review. For a config-driven pipeline with typed hand-off between steps, tutti fits better.

Common failure modes

Agents sharing one working tree and clobbering each other

One-click merge without human review

Ignoring a GPL obligation in a commercial codebase

Assuming a deprecated tool is still maintained

Related templates

Maker-Checker Loop Code Review Loop

FAQ

A git worktree is a second working directory attached to the same repository, on its own branch. Each agent gets one so parallel edits never collide.

Sources & further reading

awesome-agent-orchestrators