Oqoqo
A benchmark builder for AI coding agents — lets you set up a task, run Claude Code, Cursor, or Copilot against it, and see exactly which one actually finished the job and how.
🔗 Visit Oqoqo
Description
It's easy to claim one AI coding agent is "better" than another, but hard to prove it without running the same task through each one and comparing results side by side — which normally means manually setting up isolated test environments for every agent you want to compare. Oqoqo automates that: you define a task and a grading rubric once, and it runs multiple agents against identical, isolated environments so you get an apples-to-apples comparison instead of anecdote.
It supports 11+ agents and coding assistants — including Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, OpenCode, Grok Build, and Qwen Code — and lets you bring your own model provider and API keys rather than locking you into Oqoqo's own inference. Results come with full trajectory logging: pass/fail outcomes, token usage, friction points, and every tool call the agent made, accessible via web app, CLI, or MCP. It plugs into CI/CD so evaluations can trigger automatically on code changes, which is the difference between a one-off benchmark and an ongoing regression check on agent behavior.
💬 Our review
The short version: if you're choosing between AI coding agents for your team, or you maintain a tool that agents interact with and want to know if you've broken something for them, Oqoqo is a purpose-built way to get real evidence instead of vibes.
It sits in a growing but still-consolidating space of agent-evaluation platforms (Braintrust, Confident AI, Galileo, Agenta) — Oqoqo's specific niche is coding-agent benchmarking with CI/CD integration and bring-your-own-key flexibility, rather than general LLM-application observability. The free tier (100 runs/month) is enough to seriously kick the tires; the $20/month Pro tier for 300 runs is inexpensive for a team actually using this to make agent-selection decisions or gate merges. The main limitation is scope: it's built for evaluating agent task performance specifically, not full production LLM observability, so teams needing broader tracing across a live application should look at Braintrust or Latitude instead.
💰 Pricing
📊 Global score
🤖 AI-enriched data
Free : 100 runs/mois. Pro : 20$/mois (300 runs). Ultra : 60$/mois (1000 runs). Recharges à la carte de 5$ (25 runs) à 120$ (1000 runs).
Pros
Compare 11+ agents (Claude Code, Copilot, Cursor, Grok Build...) sur des environnements isolés identiques
Bring-your-own-key : pas de dépendance à un seul fournisseur de modèle
Journalisation complète de la trajectoire : token usage, points de friction, appels d'outils
Intégration CI/CD pour déclencher des évaluations à chaque changement de code
Accessible via web, CLI et MCP
Cons
Scope limité à l'évaluation de tâches agentiques, pas d'observabilité production complète
Marché encombré (Braintrust, Confident AI, Galileo, Agenta) — différenciation à confirmer dans la durée
Recharges à la carte peuvent coûter cher en usage intensif ponctuel
Pas d'informations publiques sur le financement ou la taille de l'équipe