Skip to content
kiloloop / agent-estimate / compare
← back to agent-estimate

$ agent-estimate --compare

Three ways
to know.

No estimation, manual, or agent-estimate — three approaches to scoping AI-agent work. Here's how they actually compare, on the dimensions that matter.

· 250+ dispatches validated (May 2026) · 8 dimensions · no marketing
agent-estimate --compare --tldr zsh
$ agent-estimate --compare --tldr
 
scoring against: speed, accuracy, AI-fit, ci, ux
────────────────────────────────────────────────
 
✗ --no-estimate 0/5 risky for anything with a deadline
~ --manual 2/5 slow, optimistic, AI-blind
✓ --agent-estimate 5/5 calibrated, fast, CI-ready
 
recommendation ─────────────────────────────────
use agent-estimate when AI agents touch your sprint.
use manual for judgment-heavy planning.
use no estimate for throwaway code only.
 
→ see full breakdown below ↓

OVERVIEW

At a glance.

--no-estimate RISKY

No estimation

// Ship and hope.

Zero upfront cost, but scope creep, missed deadlines, and surprise failures. Fine for prototypes and throwaway experiments. Dangerous for anything with a deadline.

--manual SLOW

Manual estimation

// Human guesses in planning meetings.

Slow (30–60 min per sprint), systematically optimistic, and blind to AI-specific speed differences. The estimates degrade as model capabilities change quarter to quarter.

DIFF

Side-by-side, dimension by dimension.

$ agent-estimate --compare --table

agent-estimate compare · table diff
dimension --no-est --manual --agent-estimate
Time to estimate -0 ~30–60 min/sprint +~2 seconds
Accuracy -N/A ~±50–100% +85% within ±30%
AI speed awareness -no ~rarely +per-model multipliers
Dependency analysis -no ~whiteboard +automated wave planning
METR reliability -no ~no +built-in thresholds
CI integration -no ~no +GitHub Action
Review overhead -ignored ~sometimes +3 modes (std/complex/3-round)
Improves over time -no ~slowly +ae calibrate
8 dimensions · 3 approaches +8 ~0 -0  winner: agent-estimate

DECIDE

When to use each.

decide.sh bash
# pick by project context
case $context in
 
prototype)
estimator="--no-estimate"
# throwaway, near-zero cost of being wrong
;;
 
mature_team)
estimator="--manual"
# judgment-heavy, distrusts automation
;;
 
ai_workflow)
estimator="--agent-estimate"
# AI agents, CI budgets, repeatable
;;
 
esac
prototype → --no-estimate

Prototyping, hackathons, throwaway scripts where the cost of being wrong is near zero.

mature_team → --manual

Established velocity, judgment-heavy work (design, strategy), or stakeholders who distrust automation.

ai_workflow → --agent-estimate

Sprint planning with AI agents, CI pipelines with time budgets, multi-agent workflows, repeatable estimates across changing models.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions.

01

?How accurate is agent-estimate?

Across 250+ validated dispatches (May 2026 corpus), 61% of estimates land within ±30% of actual duration out of the box. With calibration modifiers (spec clarity, warm context, agent fit), accuracy improves to 85% within ±30%. ae calibrate feeds actual results back in.

02

?Does it work with models other than Claude?

Yes. Built-in METR thresholds cover Claude (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku), GPT-5.5/5.4, and Gemini 3.1 Pro. Custom thresholds for any model in your agent config YAML.

03

?How does PERT estimation work?

PERT uses three time estimates per task — optimistic, most likely, pessimistic — to compute a weighted expected duration: (O + 4M + P) / 6. Produces a probability distribution rather than a single-point guess.

04

?Can I use it without the CLI?

Yes. The Claude Code plugin adds /estimate as a slash command. The GitHub Action runs estimates in CI and posts results as PR comments. Same structured output across all three.

$ start estimating

Stop guessing. Start shipping.

One command. No account. Reports in seconds.