# ecco vs. Claude and ChatGPT on their own: do your agents need a board? [2026]

_Claude, Claude Code, ChatGPT and Codex each track their own work. ecco gives them one shared board with evidence and decision rules. What each covers._

By Saad Ahmed, 2026-10-01. Facts about Claude and ChatGPT on their own checked 2026-10-01.

## Choose ecco if

- You use agents from more than one company and want them all working from one board
- You want one inbox for every decision your agents need from you, across every project
- You want each agent to attach evidence before its task counts as done

## Choose Claude and ChatGPT on their own if

- You use one assistant, one person, and the work fits inside its own projects
- You want the assistant to keep memory, schedule runs and hand you pull requests on its own

Let me say up front that ecco doesn't replace Claude or ChatGPT. ecco never runs a model. Your agents still do the work. ecco is the board they do it from.

So this isn't a contest. It's a question I hear a lot: Claude Code has a task list, Codex runs tasks in the cloud, ChatGPT has projects and scheduled tasks. Why would you need a board on top of that?

I think the short answer is this. Each of them tracks its own work, and does it well, in its own place. Once you have more than one agent, or more than one company's agent, or work that runs longer than a session, you want one place where the work lives and the same rules apply to every agent. Here's what each tool covers on its own, from Anthropic's and OpenAI's own documentation, and where ecco fits.

## ecco vs. Claude and ChatGPT on their own at a glance

|  | ecco | Claude and ChatGPT on their own |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Where tasks live | One shared board in the cloud | Inside each product: Claude Code's task list is local files; Codex and ChatGPT keep their own task history |
| Which agents can use it | Any agent that speaks MCP: Claude, ChatGPT, Codex or your own | Each product's own agents |
| Decisions you owe | One inbox across every project; only a person can answer | Approvals inside each session; Claude Code Projects groups threads "Waiting on you" within one project |
| Marking work done | Agents must attach a PR, commit or evidence reference first | No built-in rule; Claude Code hooks let you build one |
| Two agents, one task | One live claim per task, across every agent | Claude Code agent teams lock claims within one team; Codex worktrees keep files apart |
| Who can see the work | Up to 5 people and 25 agents per workspace | Varies; Claude Code Projects belong to one person |
| Price | Free in beta; then $79 a year per workspace | Included in the subscription you already pay for |

## Each assistant tracks its own work; ecco is one board every agent shares

I use these tools every day. They're good, and they keep getting better. Claude Code keeps a task list with pending, in-progress and completed steps that survives when the conversation is compacted. Its Projects beta runs parallel threads, each on its own branch and pull request, under one coordinator. Codex gives each cloud task its own workspace and keeps working while your laptop is closed. ChatGPT projects carry their own memory, and scheduled tasks run on a timer.

Each of these lives inside one product. Claude Code's task list is stored as files on your machine, and only Claude Code reads it. Codex's task history lives in Codex. If you ask Codex to pick up what Claude Code was doing yesterday, it has nothing to read. I hit this wall a lot.

ecco puts the work in one place that any agent can reach over MCP. A task filed from the browser, started by Claude Code and finished by Codex is the same task, with the same history, the same decisions and the same evidence. Tomorrow's session starts from what already happened instead of a blank prompt.

**What it's worth:** you stop pasting the goal, the limits and last week's decision into every new session, and you can switch agents without losing the work.

## Each assistant asks you in its own window; ecco gives every decision one inbox

All of these tools ask before they do something consequential. ChatGPT's agent asks for confirmation before actions that affect the world. Claude Code asks for permission before commands you haven't allowed. Those prompts are the right default.

The catch is where they show up: inside the session that's asking. If you run four agents across two products (I usually do), you have four windows to check. That gets old fast. Claude Code's Projects beta helps here: its overview groups threads that are "Waiting on you." That view covers one project, for one person, running Anthropic's models.

In ecco, when a call belongs to you, the agent writes the question on the task with its options and the one it recommends. Every open question from every agent, in every project, lands in one inbox. The database refuses an answer from anything but a signed-in person, so an agent can't approve its own question. If the task changes before you answer, your answer is refused as stale, so no agent acts on a decision made against an older picture of the work.

**What it's worth:** you check one inbox instead of every agent's window, and the decisions there are still open and still yours.

## The assistants let you build a "done" check; ecco enforces one on every agent

Codex is built to end in a reviewable diff or pull request (a great habit). Claude Code goes further for people who want to set it up: a TaskCompleted hook can block a task from being marked complete. But you write that hook, for that tool. Instructions in a project file help too, though Anthropic's own docs note they aren't enforced settings.

In ecco the rule is part of the board. An agent can't move a task to review or Done until it attaches a reference to the work: a pull request, a commit or an evidence record. It holds for every agent, from every company, without any setup. A reference doesn't prove the work is good. It gives you something specific to check.

**What it's worth:** every task an agent finishes comes with a link you can check, whichever agent finished it.

## Agent teams lock claims inside one session; ecco locks them across every agent

Claude Code's agent teams are the most advanced coordination built into any of these tools. Teammates share a task list, and claiming uses file locking so two teammates don't take the same task. It's an experimental feature, off by default, with one team per session. Codex runs parallel agents in separate worktrees, which keeps their file changes from colliding.

Neither stops a Claude Code session and a Codex task from starting the same work. I've watched it happen. ecco stops it. An agent claims a task before it starts, and only one live claim is granted per task, whichever company made the agent. The agent that loses is told who has the task. Claims expire after five minutes unless renewed, so a crashed agent doesn't lock the task.

**What it's worth:** you don't pay twice for the same task, and work that stalls gets picked back up.

## ecco adds to the subscription you already pay for

Your Claude or ChatGPT subscription pays for the model and its built-in tools. ecco doesn't run a model, so it doesn't replace any of that.

ecco is free while it's in beta. After the beta it's one plan: $79 a year per workspace, for up to 5 people and 25 connected agents, whichever companies make them.

## ecco or Claude and ChatGPT on their own: which should you choose?

If you work alone with one assistant and the work fits in its projects, the built-in tools may be all you need. They're good, and they're improving fast.

Once you hand work to more than one agent, or keep work going for longer than a session, choose ecco. Your agents keep doing the work. ecco gives them one board to share, one inbox for the decisions that are yours, evidence on every finished task, and one live claim per task. It's free during the beta, and it works with the Claude and ChatGPT tools you already use. Here's how to set it up: [ecco with Claude and Claude Code](/blog/ecco-with-claude), and [ecco with ChatGPT and Codex](/blog/ecco-with-chatgpt).

If you're also comparing task trackers, read [ecco vs. Linear](/blog/ecco-vs-linear), [ecco vs. Plane](/blog/ecco-vs-plane) and [ecco vs. t0ggles](/blog/ecco-vs-t0ggles).

## Frequently asked questions

### Does ecco replace Claude or ChatGPT?

No. ecco never runs a model. Claude Code, Codex, ChatGPT or your own agent does the work; ecco is the board they work from.

### Doesn't Claude Code already have a task list?

Yes. Claude Code keeps a task list for its own work, stored as local files that Claude Code reads. ecco is a shared board in the cloud that any MCP agent can read and write, with evidence and decision rules on top.

### Can ChatGPT use ecco?

Yes. On Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise and Edu, turn on developer mode in ChatGPT's settings and add https://api.heyecco.com/mcp as an app. You sign in to ecco and approve access. An ecco plugin for ChatGPT and Codex is on its way to OpenAI's plugin directory.

### Can Claude Code and Codex work on the same ecco board?

Yes. Both connect to the same MCP address. Each agent gets its own access, and only one agent can hold a live claim on a task at a time.

We make ecco. Report outdated facts to saad@cosmiclabs.net.

## Sources

- [Claude Code: task list](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/interactive-mode)
- [Claude Code: agent teams](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/agent-teams)
- [Claude Code: Projects](https://code.claude.com/docs/en/claude-projects)
- [Claude: chat search and memory](https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11817273-use-claude-s-chat-search-and-memory-to-build-on-previous-context)
- [ChatGPT: Projects](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/10169521-projects-in-chatgpt)
- [ChatGPT: scheduled tasks](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/10291617-scheduled-tasks-in-chatgpt)
- [ChatGPT agent](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11752874-chatgpt-agent)
- [Codex cloud](https://developers.openai.com/codex/cloud)
- [Introducing the Codex app](https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/)