71 comments

[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 76.2 ms ] thread
The backing to OpenClaw/MoltBot whatever they're calling themselves. Why is it insecure, well, Pi tells you >No permission popups.

Anyway, even if you give your agent permission, there's no secure way to know whether what they're asking to is what they'll actually do, etc.

Just how expensive was that domain?
Has anyone used an open coding agent in headless mode? I have a system cobbled together with exceptions going to a centralized system where I can then have each one pulled out and `claude -p`'d but I'd rather just integrate an open coding agent into the loop because it's less janky and then I'll have it try to fix the problem and propose a PR for me to review. If anyone else has used pi.dev or opencode or aider in this mode (completely non-interactive until the PR) I'd be curious to hear.

EDIT: Thank you to both responders. I'll just try the two options out then.

I've been using Pi day to day recently for simple, smaller tasks. It's a great harness for use with smaller parameter size models given the system prompt is quite a bit shorter vs Claude or Codex (and it uses a nice small set of tools by default).
My current fave harness. I've been using it to great effect, since it is self-extensible, and added support for it to https://github.com/rcarmo/vibes because it is so much faster than ACP.
Is that an official term "coding harness"

Wondering if you wanted a similar interface (though a GUI not just CLI) where it's not for coding what would you call that?

Same idea cycle through models, ask question, drag-drop images, etc...

Honestly, i'm not interested in this if it can't use my subscription, but now i really want to understand this idea of coding harness. I've been exploring ideas that might be quite similar, though more inline with the scope of IDE, and it sounds like "coding harness" fits my mental model better.
Anyone managed to run pi in a completely sandboxed environment? It can only access the cwd and subdirectories
(comment deleted)
The way you’re able to extend the harness through extension/hook architecture is really cool.

Eg some form of comprehensive planning/spec workflow is best modeled as an extension vs natively built in. And the extension still ends up feeling “native” in use

Pi ships with powerful defaults but skips features like sub-agents and plan mode

Does anyone have an idea as to why this would be a feature? don't you want to have a discussion with your agent to iron out the details before moving onto the implementation (build) phase?

In any case, looks cool :)

EDIT 1: Formatting EDIT 2: Thanks everyone for your input. I was not aware of the extensibility model that pi had in mind or that you can also iterate your plan on a PLAN.md file. Very interesting approach. I'll have a look and give it a go.

Pi has made all the right design choices. Shout out to Mario (and Armin the OG stan) — great taste shows itself.
But I can't use my Codex plan with it, right? I have to use an API key?
I’ve been testing it for a few days on pretty much clean install (no customizations/extensions) and it’s ok. Not sure if I like it yet.
I haven’t met a single person who has tried pi for a few days and not made it their daily driver. Once you taste the freedom of being able to set up your tool exactly how you like, there’s really no going back.

and you can build cool stuff on top of it too!

I've been using codex for about 2 months now and am pretty happy with it. What does pi do better than codex?
Pi was probably the best ad for Claude Code I ever saw.

After my max sub expired I decided to try Kimi on a more open harness, and it ended up being one of the worst (and eye opening experiences) I had with the agentic world so far.

It was completely alienating and so much 'not for me', that afterwards I went back and immediately renewed my claude sub.

https://www.thevinter.com/blog/bad-vibes-from-pi

Interesting approach to planning via extensions. I took a similar direction with enforcement. A governance loop that hooks into the agent's tool calls and blocks execution until protocol is followed. Every 10 actions (configurable), the agent re-centers. No permission popups, but the agent literally can't skip steps.

Open source: https://github.com/isagawa-co/isagawa-kernel

I've been using pi via the pi-coding-agent Emacs package, which uses its RPC mode to populate a pair of Markdown buffers (one for input, one for chat), which I find much nicer than the awful TUIs used by harnesses like gemini-cli (Emacs works perfectly well as a TUI too!).

The extensibility is really nice. It was easy to get it using my preferred issue tracker; and I've recently overridden the built-in `read` and `write` commands to use Emacs buffers instead. I'd like to override `edit` next, but haven't figured out an approach that would play to the strengths of LLMs (i.e. not matching exact text) and Emacs (maybe using tree-sitter queries for matches?). I also gave it a general-purpose `emacs_eval`, which it has used to browse documentation with EWW.

What are people using to cost efficiently use this? I was using a Google Ultra sub which gave enough but that’s gone now.

ChatGPT $20/month is alright but I got locked out for a day after a couple hours. Considering the GitHub pro plus plan.