Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | dsh-agent-teams | Superpowers | act |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | DeepSeek Harness | Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, OpenCode | GitHub |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | MIT | MIT |
| Stars | 2387 | 304170 | 72437 |
| Last activity | — | — | — |
| Install complexity | يتطلب إصدار DSH متوافقًا وإعادة تشغيل | — | — |
| Category | Multi-Agent, Workflow | Code Review, Multi-Agent, Testing, Workflow | Testing, Git, DevOps |
| Best use | For development work that can be divided into dependent tasks and reviewed as a plan before agents start. Monitor outputs and model costs; team state is not coordinated across separate processes. | Best for a developer or project owner working on a substantial feature or a difficult bug. It helps clarify requirements, approve a plan, and inspect tests and file changes. Its value is a visible path from decision to verification. A small text edit may not need the full workflow. | Best for a developer or small team that repeatedly edits GitHub Actions workflows and wants to test a job before pushing. It provides a local run log, while a final GitHub check remains necessary. It is not suitable when exact hosted-runner parity is required. |