# ecco vs. Linear: Which is best for work you hand to AI agents? [2026]

_ecco is built for work your AI agents do: evidence before done, decisions only a person answers, one live claim per task. How it compares with Linear._

By Saad Ahmed, 2026-10-01. Facts about Linear checked 2026-10-01.

## Choose ecco if

- Your own agents, like Claude Code or Codex, do the work and you make the calls
- You want the system to refuse an agent's "done" until it attaches evidence
- You run several agents and want each task claimed by one of them at a time

## Choose Linear if

- Your team does most of the work itself and plans in cycles
- You need enterprise sign-on (SAML and SCIM) across a large organization

Linear has a line on its agents page that I think is exactly right: "Delegate issues, but not accountability."

I build ecco, and I agree with that sentence completely. When an agent works on something, a person still answers for it. The interesting question is how you make that true when the agent works at 3 a.m. and nobody is watching.

Linear's answer runs through the assignee. When you delegate an issue to an agent, "the human assignee remains responsible for the issue," and the agent is added as a contributor. Admins choose which teams an agent can access and can write guidance for it. That's a good answer for teams where people do most of the work.

ecco's answer is a set of rules the board enforces on every agent. Here's what I mean, with a small example. In September, ecco refused to let the agent running ecco's own build close two of its tasks, because both had changed after the agent started and it hadn't acknowledged the changes. We use ecco to build ecco, so the rules applied to the agent building it.

## ecco vs. Linear at a glance

|  | ecco | Linear |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Built for | People handing work to AI agents | Teams planning and building products, with agents as teammates |
| Who stays responsible | You, enforced by the board's rules | The human assignee, who stays primary on delegated issues |
| How agents connect | Remote MCP with OAuth; read-only or write per agent | Remote MCP with OAuth 2.1; read-only access available |
| Marking work done | Agents must attach a PR, commit or evidence reference first | Agent guidance can describe a review process; no proof rule found in its docs |
| When an agent needs a decision | One inbox; only a signed-in person in your workspace can answer | Comments and mentions on the issue |
| Two agents, one task | One live claim per task; claims expire if not renewed | No locking described in its agent docs |
| Which agents | Any MCP agent: Claude Code, Codex or your own | Partner agents such as Cursor, Codex and Devin |
| Planning | Tasks, projects and initiatives, kept simple for agent work | Cycles, projects, initiatives, docs and more |
| Price | Free in beta; then $79 a year per workspace | Free for 250 issues; Basic $10 per user a month, billed yearly; agents aren't billed as seats |

## Linear keeps a person accountable; ecco also makes the agent show its work

Linear lets you write agent guidance, including "what review process to follow." I think that's useful. Guidance is a request, though. An agent can still read it, misunderstand it, and report the task as finished.

ecco adds a rule underneath the request. An agent can't move a task to review or to Done until it attaches a reference to the work: a pull request, a commit, or an evidence record. Evidence records you've rejected don't count. A reference doesn't prove the work is good, but it gives you something specific to check. People can still close their own tasks; the rule is for agents.

**What it's worth:** you spend less time finding out whether an agent's work happened. When a client asks what shipped this week, you start from the references agents attached.

## Linear threads questions through comments; ecco gives every decision one inbox only a person can answer

In Linear, you talk with an agent the way you talk with a teammate: comments and mentions on the issue. That works when you're already looking at the issue.

ecco assumes you aren't. When a call belongs to you, the agent writes the question on the task with its options, the one it recommends, and why it didn't pick the others. Every open question, from every agent, 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 what the question was about changes before you answer, your answer is refused as stale, so nobody acts on a decision made against an older picture of the work. And when you settle something with an agent in chat, the agent can withdraw the question so it doesn't wait for you twice. That last rule came from my own complaint: "Why am I being asked in Inbox?"

**What it's worth:** your interruptions are limited to decisions that are still open, you can answer them in one sitting, and agents can't answer their own questions.

## Linear delegates an issue to an agent; ecco gives each task one live claim

Delegation in Linear points an issue at an agent. I couldn't find anything in Linear's agent docs that stops a second agent from starting the same issue. With one agent that never matters. With several, it starts to cost money.

In ecco, an agent claims a task before it works on it, and only one live claim is granted per task. The agent that loses is told who has the task, so it can pick up something else. Claims expire after five minutes by default unless the agent renews them, so if an agent crashes halfway through, its claim expires and another agent can take the task.

Each agent also gets its own access: read-only or able to change tasks. A workspace admin can revoke it from the Workers page, and that connection is cut off on its very next request.

**What it's worth:** claims can cut the tokens you spend on duplicate work, a crashed agent's claim doesn't lock the task, and you can let a contractor's agent onto your board with only the access it needs.

## ecco is focused on the work your agents do

Linear is a polished tracker for product teams, with cycles, projects, docs, a roster of partner agents and enterprise sign-on.

ecco puts its effort somewhere else: the moment an agent, not a person, picks up the work. That focus is why every rule in this post exists, and it's why the board stays simple. You get tasks, projects and initiatives, one inbox for decisions, and the rules that keep agent work checkable. Connect any agent that speaks MCP, like Claude Code, Codex or your own, and it works from the same board under the same rules.

## Linear charges per seat; ecco charges per workspace

Linear's free plan covers 250 issues and two teams. Basic is $10 per user a month and Business is $16, both billed yearly. Agents aren't counted as seats, which is generous. For five people on Basic, that's $600 a year.

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. ecco never runs a model, so your agents run on the Claude or OpenAI plan you already pay for.

## ecco or Linear: which should you choose?

My sense is that the choice comes down to one question: who does the work?

If your agents do it and you make the calls, choose ecco. Every task an agent finishes carries evidence you can check, every decision waits for a person, and each task can have only one live claim at a time. At $79 a year per workspace after the beta, it costs less than Linear's paid plans, even for one person.

If your team does most of the work itself and plans in cycles, Linear is a good fit for that.

Plenty of teams will use both: Linear for the team's roadmap, and ecco for the work they hand to agents.

Weighing other tools too? Read [ecco vs. Plane](/blog/ecco-vs-plane), [ecco vs. t0ggles](/blog/ecco-vs-t0ggles) and [ecco vs. Claude and ChatGPT on their own](/blog/ecco-vs-claude-and-chatgpt). Ready to try it? Here's [how to use ecco with Claude Code](/blog/ecco-with-claude) and [how to use ecco with ChatGPT and Codex](/blog/ecco-with-chatgpt).

## Frequently asked questions

### Is ecco a Linear alternative?

Yes, for work you hand to AI agents. ecco is built around what agent work needs: evidence before a task is done, decisions only a person can answer, and one live claim per task.

### How much does ecco cost compared with Linear?

ecco is free during the beta, then $79 a year per workspace for up to 5 people and 25 agents. Linear is free for 250 issues; Basic is $10 per user a month billed yearly, or $600 a year for five people. Linear doesn't bill agents as seats.

### Can two agents work on the same task in ecco?

Only one agent can hold a live claim on a task. Claims expire after five minutes by default unless renewed; if an agent stops responding, its claim expires and another agent can claim the task.

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

## Sources

- [Linear pricing](https://linear.app/pricing)
- [Linear for Agents](https://linear.app/agents)
- [Linear docs: AI agents in Linear](https://linear.app/docs/agents-in-linear)
- [Linear docs: MCP server](https://linear.app/docs/mcp)