AdaL

Coding agent that routes work to specialized workers across frontier model families

KINDA · partial replacement
price $20/mosubscription / year $240estimated build time weekendreplaced by 0 people

The core loop is genuinely reachable: open-source agents already route across model families, run tools, and edit repos, and a weekend of wiring gets you a personal version. What does not fall out of a weekend is the harness around the model, which is where AdaL claims its numbers come from, plus browser-based verification, clustered code review, and the team controls. You end up with an agent that works and a noticeably worse recovery rate on long tasks.

Build verification: not recorded. How we judge buildability

What you give up

  • harness tuning: the planning, recovery and verification work that separates a demo agent from one that finishes long tasks
  • browser-use verification of the app you just changed
  • review clustering that groups a large diff into risk-ranked units
  • one bill across every frontier provider instead of six metered API accounts
  • SSO, SAML/SCIM, zero data retention and org-level model deny lists

Why people still pay

Because the gap between an agent that runs and an agent that finishes is mostly unglamorous harness work, and nobody wants to maintain it on a weekend. The flat subscription across every frontier model is the other half: DIY means holding API accounts with six vendors and watching the meter on every long run.

Your build guide

The stack, security requirements, and agent rules for a focused replacement.

Before you start

  • Node, Git, a selected repository, a provider API key and a per-run budget. Start with a fixture repository and a read-only tool set; browser workers are outside this release.
  • Implementation components: Node.js and TypeScript with a terminal interface and provider SDK adapters. SQLite run metadata, append-only JSONL tool traces and isolated Git worktrees for explicitly assigned workers.
  • Scope boundary: Enterprise identity, provider billing consolidation and autonomous browser verification are separate projects.
01
Node.js and TypeScript with a terminal interface and provider SDK adapters.
02
SQLite run metadata, append-only JSONL tool traces and isolated Git worktrees for explicitly assigned workers.
03
Domain model: repository roots, branch/HEAD snapshots, agent runs, assigned worker scopes, tool calls and usage receipts
engineering roadmap

Implementation plan

1

Phase 1

Scope and fixtures. Implement this bounded workflow: Build a terminal planner that assigns bounded repository tasks to workers with separate contexts. Offer read/search first, inspectable patches second, and explicitly approved shell commands; resume a saved run with a configurable model adapter and budget. Record prerequisites, select representative user-owned fixtures and document the unsupported features: Enterprise identity, provider billing consolidation and autonomous browser verification are separate projects.

2

Phase 2

Durable model. Model repository roots, branch/HEAD snapshots, agent runs, assigned worker scopes, tool calls and usage receipts Add migrations or a versioned document format, explicit validation, stable IDs and a visible import-error report. Preserve this rule: Workers cannot write outside their assigned root or overwrite another worker's change; reported usage distinguishes provider counts from estimates.

3

Phase 3

Complete the first useful path. Implement the workflow's input, review and output interface, with clear controls and explicit empty/error states. Checkpoint each step with input hashes and external receipts. Separate safe retries from unknown side effects; resume from the last confirmed step with a run budget and cancellation.

4

Phase 4

Permissions and integration failure. Resolve and enforce repository/worktree root containment, including symlinks, before every file operation. Respect filesystem permissions, require explicit tool/shell approval and bound command duration. Keep provider secrets and confidential file contents out of terminal diagnostics and run traces; model output cannot expand tool access. Request integration credentials and permissions only for the enabled feature; show a disconnected state instead of mock results.

5

Phase 5

Portable handoff. Save run state and tool receipts without secrets. Resume against the recorded branch/HEAD or stop for reconciliation; retain patches and worktrees until the owner accepts or discards them. Include setup, operating limits, fixture walkthrough and shutdown/restart instructions in the README.

6

Phase 6

Acceptance scenarios. Two workers touching the same file produce a conflict for review; an interrupted tool call resumes without rerunning an unknown external action. Repeat the workflow after restart and with a denied permission or unavailable dependency; show recoverable failure rather than a success placeholder.

the pro prompt
download AGENTS.md
WORKING SLICE
Build a terminal planner that assigns bounded repository tasks to workers with separate contexts. Offer read/search first, inspectable patches second, and explicitly approved shell commands; resume a saved run with a configurable model adapter and budget.

Build this scoped AdaL-inspired workflow with a documented data model and visible failure states.

Architecture
- Node.js and TypeScript with a terminal interface and provider SDK adapters.
- SQLite run metadata, append-only JSONL tool traces and isolated Git worktrees for explicitly assigned workers.

Prerequisites and limits
Node, Git, a selected repository, a provider API key and a per-run budget. Start with a fixture repository and a read-only tool set; browser workers are outside this release.
Outside this release: Enterprise identity, provider billing consolidation and autonomous browser verification are separate projects.

Data model and correctness
repository roots, branch/HEAD snapshots, agent runs, assigned worker scopes, tool calls and usage receipts
Invariant: Workers cannot write outside their assigned root or overwrite another worker's change; reported usage distinguishes provider counts from estimates.
Checkpoint each step with input hashes and external receipts. Separate safe retries from unknown side effects; resume from the last confirmed step with a run budget and cancellation.

Security and privacy
Resolve and enforce repository/worktree root containment, including symlinks, before every file operation. Respect filesystem permissions, require explicit tool/shell approval and bound command duration. Keep provider secrets and confidential file contents out of terminal diagnostics and run traces; model output cannot expand tool access.

Recovery and export
Save run state and tool receipts without secrets. Resume against the recorded branch/HEAD or stop for reconciliation; retain patches and worktrees until the owner accepts or discards them.

Implementation order
1. Phase 1 — Scope and fixtures. Implement this bounded workflow: Build a terminal planner that assigns bounded repository tasks to workers with separate contexts. Offer read/search first, inspectable patches second, and explicitly approved shell commands; resume a saved run with a configurable model adapter and budget. Record prerequisites, select representative user-owned fixtures and document the unsupported features: Enterprise identity, provider billing consolidation and autonomous browser verification are separate projects.
2. Phase 2 — Durable model. Model repository roots, branch/HEAD snapshots, agent runs, assigned worker scopes, tool calls and usage receipts Add migrations or a versioned document format, explicit validation, stable IDs and a visible import-error report. Preserve this rule: Workers cannot write outside their assigned root or overwrite another worker's change; reported usage distinguishes provider counts from estimates.
3. Phase 3 — Complete the first useful path. Implement the workflow's input, review and output interface, with clear controls and explicit empty/error states. Checkpoint each step with input hashes and external receipts. Separate safe retries from unknown side effects; resume from the last confirmed step with a run budget and cancellation.
4. Phase 4 — Permissions and integration failure. Resolve and enforce repository/worktree root containment, including symlinks, before every file operation. Respect filesystem permissions, require explicit tool/shell approval and bound command duration. Keep provider secrets and confidential file contents out of terminal diagnostics and run traces; model output cannot expand tool access. Request integration credentials and permissions only for the enabled feature; show a disconnected state instead of mock results.
5. Phase 5 — Portable handoff. Save run state and tool receipts without secrets. Resume against the recorded branch/HEAD or stop for reconciliation; retain patches and worktrees until the owner accepts or discards them. Include setup, operating limits, fixture walkthrough and shutdown/restart instructions in the README.
6. Phase 6 — Acceptance scenarios. Two workers touching the same file produce a conflict for review; an interrupted tool call resumes without rerunning an unknown external action. Repeat the workflow after restart and with a denied permission or unavailable dependency; show recoverable failure rather than a success placeholder.

Acceptance
Two workers touching the same file produce a conflict for review; an interrupted tool call resumes without rerunning an unknown external action.
Use real source data or clearly labeled fixtures. Explain unsupported input and provider failures; do not fabricate analytics, delivery receipts, accuracy claims or security guarantees.

Optional agent guidance
Optional external skill: [sharp-edges](https://github.com/trailofbits/skills/blob/main/plugins/sharp-edges/skills/sharp-edges/SKILL.md) — Review security-sensitive APIs and configuration for dangerous defaults and easy-to-misuse interfaces. Review its instructions and compatibility before use; it does not grant deployment, data-access or publication permission.
Project rule — data model: repository roots, branch/HEAD snapshots, agent runs, assigned worker scopes, tool calls and usage receipts
Project rule — preserve this invariant: Workers cannot write outside their assigned root or overwrite another worker's change; reported usage distinguishes provider counts from estimates.
Project rule — acceptance evidence: Two workers touching the same file produce a conflict for review; an interrupted tool call resumes without rerunning an unknown external action.

$ open in your agent (prompt prefilled, you press enter), copy the prompt or copy or download AGENTS.md

share on X ↗

Alternatives to building your own

OpenCodeA terminal coding agent with no loyalty to any model vendor; you still pay the meter.198kaug 2026open source↗ClineAn agent that lives in the editor you already use; the model bill is still yours.66kaug 2026open source↗GooseA desktop and terminal agent with real extension support, and no pretence that the model is free.53kaug 2026open source↗

all 3 free alternatives to AdaL →· no votes, no pay-to-list · just what's real

AdaL pricing

planmonthlyannual (per mo)what you get
free 7-day access$0—Full access for the first week only; the published page states no numeric usage cap for the trial.A trial, not a free tier.
pro$20$16.60Standard usage, positioned for short coding sprints in small codebases; no published numeric token or request allowance.Annual price derived from the vendor's advertised 17% annual saving; the page shows a monthly/annual toggle.
max$100$83Described as 5x usage relative to Pro; the base unit behind the multiplier is not published.Annual price derived from the advertised 17% annual saving.
max+$200$166Described as 20x usage relative to Pro, with the widest model access.Annual price derived from the advertised 17% annual saving.
teams & enterprise——Up to 150 seats, custom usage limits, SSO, SAML/SCIM, zero data retention, org-level model and autonomy controls. Price is quote-only.Book-a-demo motion; no public price.

free tierno free tier, only a 7-day trial

billingmonthly + annual for self-serve plans, annual advertised at 17% off; Teams and Enterprise are custom-quoted

hidden costsModel inference is included in the subscription rather than billed per token, so the usage multipliers between Pro, Max and Max+ are the real cost lever and are not expressed in published numeric limits.

pricing sources checked 2026-08-14 · pricing source ↗

Questions about AdaL

Can you build your own AdaL with AI?

Partly. The core loop is genuinely reachable: open-source agents already route across model families, run tools, and edit repos, and a weekend of wiring gets you a personal version. What does not fall out of a weekend is the harness around the model, which is where AdaL claims its numbers come from, plus browser-based verification, clustered code review, and the team controls. You end up with an agent that works and a noticeably worse recovery rate on long tasks.

What does the AdaL build prompt cover?

The prompt starts with this scope: Build a terminal planner that assigns bounded repository tasks to workers with separate contexts. Offer read/search first, inspectable patches second, and explicitly approved shell commands; resume a saved run with a configurable model adapter and budget. Full-product capabilities excluded from the comparison include: harness tuning: the planning, recovery and verification work that separates a demo agent from one that finishes long tasks; browser-use verification of the app you just changed; review clustering that groups a large diff into risk-ranked units. Follow the implementation plan and its prerequisites before expanding the build.

How do I use the prompt, AGENTS.md and agent skills?

Start with the AdaL prerequisites and stack, then copy the prompt into your coding agent. Save the project rules as AGENTS.md in the project root. Linked skills are optional packages or source instructions for specific tasks; review their current contents and install only those matching the chosen stack. A skill does not supply API credentials or verify the finished app.

How long will this AdaL project take?

The catalogue estimate is weekend for the limited scope. Setup, integration approvals, debugging, deployment and ongoing maintenance can add time. This is an estimate, not a delivery guarantee.

What would I give up by replacing AdaL?

harness tuning: the planning, recovery and verification work that separates a demo agent from one that finishes long tasks; browser-use verification of the app you just changed; review clustering that groups a large diff into risk-ranked units; one bill across every frontier provider instead of six metered API accounts; SSO, SAML/SCIM, zero data retention and org-level model deny lists. Because the gap between an agent that runs and an agent that finishes is mostly unglamorous harness work, and nobody wants to maintain it on a weekend. The flat subscription across every frontier model is the other half: DIY means holding API accounts with six vendors and watching the meter on every long run.

What price is this guide comparing against?

The recorded Pro plan is $20/mo (monthly), checked 2026-08-14. Check the linked pricing source before buying. Building your own also has hosting, API and maintenance costs; the recorded amount is not a guaranteed saving.

What can I use instead of building AdaL?

OpenCode: A terminal coding agent with no loyalty to any model vendor; you still pay the meter. Cline: An agent that lives in the editor you already use; the model bill is still yours. Goose: A desktop and terminal agent with real extension support, and no pretence that the model is free. Compare all listed options at https://howtovibecodeit.dev/adal/alternatives. Check each option's license, hosting needs and feature limits.

Every week, more subscriptions die.

New verdicts, new prompts, the week's most-doomed apps.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

last week:100 Questions · KINDA1of10 · KINDA1Password · KINDA+1090 more

free forever · no scanner spam · the prompt stays on the site, the deaths come to you

$weekly: what got a verdict, what died.