agentsmill/age-of-agents: AI tool review & score

Score7.6

Popularity5.0

Risklow

TierSilver

Score breakdown

Usefulness7.0

Novelty7.0

Momentum3.5

Maturity5.6

Open-source/build7.4

Evidence7.2

Workflow potential8.4

Setup ease6.5

Popularity is tracked separately. Support, ads, sponsorships, and tips never affect these signals.

Why it matters

Useful for power-user Claude Code / Codex / OpenCode / Koda users who want a calm second-monitor visualization of what their agents are quietly up to without leaving the terminal; the realm's quiet animation surface (settlers / workshops / storehouse fill) is a glanceable substitute for staring at the agent's tool-call stream. The durability case is the multi-agent source coverage (Claude Code + C

Who should use it

Any developer running multiple AI coding agents (Claude Code + Codex + OpenCode + Koda + Claude in local Docker via `docker exec` auto-discovery) who wants a calm second-monitor visualization of what the fleet is quietly up to without leaving the terminalAnyone running heterogeneous agent fleets where some sessions are in the Cloud and some are local — the local-LLM coverage (`aoa local llama3` wraps Ollama and logs the run as a hero with auto-read context window; `aoa local-proxy` for llama.cpp / vLLM / oMLX / coding-agent clients) is the right shape for thisAnyone whose workflow mixes Claude Code + Codex — the `AOA_SOURCES=claude,codex` env var and `AOA_CODEX_LOOKBACK_DAYS=3` flag subset which session sources are watched and how far back the Codex window reachesAnyone using Beads for issue tracking — the optional Architect's Hall side panel reads Beads issues (`.beads/issues.jsonl` falling back to `bd list --json`) for the active project, polls every few seconds, and surfaces them in the side panelAnyone who wants a graph view of the codebase — the bundled dependency-free graphify generator (`npm run graphify` writes `graphify-out/graph.json` with symbol / edge / community stats, schema-compatible with the external Graphify tool) is a one-command dependency-free alternativeAnyone who wants an opt-in interactive agent control panel — turn on interactive mode and the panel can answer Claude Code permission prompts + plan approvals via local hooks (`127.0.0.1`-only; unanswered prompts fall back to the terminal; the app never auto-allows; 'always allow' rules live in `~/.age-of-agents/permission-policy.json` and the app never edits the policy file)Anyone who picks a fantasy vs sci-fi aesthetic — two switchable themes (Fantasy top-down keep / mage tower / library / guild / market / mine / orchard / ponds, Sci-Fi isometric command center / hangars / drone factory / ore refinery / research lab on a calm Martian colony) make the realm feel like an actual refuge rather than another terminal window

Who should skip it

Hold off on agentsmill/age-of-agents until it graduates from watchlist status with stronger evidence.

About this signal

agentsmill/age-of-agents is tracked by RepoRadar as a calm second-monitor pixel-art re in the Developer Workflow section. It was first seen on 2026-07-04 and last updated on 2026-07-04. The current verdict is 'worth watch' with a Silver tier and review needed setup difficulty. The standout signals for agentsmill/age-of-agents are workflow potential (8.4) and open-source/build quality (7.4), while momentum (3.5) trails — that balance shapes where it fits best. This page summarizes the evidence RepoRadar has captured from captured source metadata. The score, tier, risk label, and verdict on this page are never influenced by sponsorship, ads, or tips — they reflect only the usefulness, popularity, novelty, momentum, maturity, and evidence signals described in the RepoRadar methodology.

How this item is evaluated

RepoRadar assigned agentsmill/age-of-agents a composite score of 7.6 out of 10, placing it in the Silver tier. This score combines weighted sub-signals: usefulness (35%), novelty (18%), momentum (14%), maturity (10%), open-source/build quality (7%), evidence quality (6%), workflow potential (6%), and setup ease (4%). Popularity is tracked separately at 5.0 and never affects the composite score or tier. The risk label of 'low' reflects inherent user-impacting hazards, not generic novelty. Items with no risk flag may still require normal code review before production use.

Putting this into practice? Read How to vet an AI agent or MCP server before you wire it in for the checklist behind this score.

Risk explanation

Risk label is still being reviewed from the captured evidence. Treat the item as unknown-risk until you review the linked source, permissions, setup path, and data access.

Evidence links

github.com

Closest alternatives / related signals

claude-codecodexopencodekodavisualizerpixijsreactvite