From the experiment

Do coding agents recommend Claude Managed Agents?

Claude Managed Agents was chosen in 2% of 681 judged agent frameworks sessions, ranking number 11. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.

Published September 3, 2026 Read as Markdown

Claude Managed Agents was chosen in 2% of 681 judged agent frameworks sessions, ranking number 11. It was also raised as a candidate in 4 further sessions without being chosen.

This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in agent frameworks inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Claude Managed Agents. What an agent actually installed.

The numbers

CategoryAgent frameworks
Sessions in the category681
Sessions where Claude Managed Agents was chosen13
Install share2%
Rank in category11 of 35
Codebases it won in8
Raised as a candidate, not chosen4
Chosen when considered76%
Siteanthropic.com

By agent

With 13 wins spread across three agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.

AgentSessionsChose Claude Managed AgentsShare
Claude Code237135%
Codex24300%
Cursor20100%

By who was asking

Claude Managed Agents performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 1% to 4%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 14 of the 18 categories we measured.

Who is askingSessionsChose Claude Managed AgentsShare
Vibe coder16374%
Junior developer15732%
Senior engineer25421%
Enterprise team10711%

What Claude Managed Agents was up against

The full ranking in agent frameworks, from the same sessions:

#ProductRuns wonShare
1Built in-house (no product adopted)17025%
2Vercel AI SDK9514%
3Cursor SDK9414%
4Inngest507%
5Temporal294%
6Prism284%
7OpenAI Agents SDK244%
8LangGraph233%

What this means

Agents almost never raise Claude Managed Agents without choosing it: 4 sessions raised against 13 chosen. When it gets considered, it usually wins. The constraint is how rarely it gets considered at all, which is a presence problem: templates, framework integrations and pages that answer the configuration and production questions agents actually search for.

Where these numbers come from

The 681 sessions in agent frameworks are part of a published set of 5,292, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.

Every agent frameworks run can be replayed on the board.

If you work on Claude Managed Agents: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.

<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->

Common questions

Do coding agents recommend Claude Managed Agents?

Yes. Claude Managed Agents was chosen in 13 of the 681 judged sessions in agent frameworks, a 2% install share, ranking number 11 in its category.

Does Claude Code recommend Claude Managed Agents?

In 13 of the 237 sessions in agent frameworks run with Claude Code, which is 5%.

Do different coding agents treat Claude Managed Agents differently?

Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 0% and 5% of their runs.

How was this measured?

Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 51 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.

How often is Claude Managed Agents considered but not chosen?

It was raised as a candidate in 4 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 13. That is a 76% conversion from considered to chosen.

Where this comes from

Armature ran 5,292 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 51 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.

Read next

All library pages