Do coding agents recommend Laravel Queues?
Laravel Queues was chosen in 7% of 288 judged message queues sessions, ranking fourth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
Laravel Queues was chosen in 7% of 288 judged message queues sessions, ranking fourth. It was also raised as a candidate in 10 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in message queues inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Laravel Queues. What an agent actually installed.
One thing to read first: every one of those wins came from a single codebase. That is a result about one repository rather than about message queues in general, and the splits below cannot separate the two. Treat them as a description of that repository.
The numbers
| Category | Message queues |
| Sessions in the category | 288 |
| Sessions where Laravel Queues was chosen | 20 |
| Install share | 7% |
| Rank in category | 4 of 25 |
| Codebases it won in | 1 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 10 |
| Chosen when considered | 67% |
| Site | laravel.com |
By agent
The three agents agree closely on Laravel Queues, choosing it at rates within 2 points of each other.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Laravel Queues | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 96 | 8 | 8% |
| Codex | 96 | 6 | 6% |
| Cursor | 96 | 6 | 6% |
By who was asking
Laravel Queues does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 17% of sessions asked as junior developer and 0% of those asked as enterprise team.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Laravel Queues | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 48 | 0 | 0% |
| Junior developer | 120 | 20 | 17% |
| Senior engineer | 48 | 0 | 0% |
| Enterprise team | 72 | 0 | 0% |
What Laravel Queues was up against
The full ranking in message queues, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 49 | 17% |
| 2 | Apache Kafka | 39 | 14% |
| 3 | Amazon SQS | 27 | 9% |
| 4 | Service Bus | 24 | 8% |
| 5 | Laravel Queues (this page) | 20 | 7% |
| 6 | Amazon Kinesis | 19 | 7% |
| 7 | Cloudflare Queues | 19 | 7% |
| 8 | Cloud Tasks | 15 | 5% |
What this means
Agents almost never raise Laravel Queues without choosing it: 10 sessions raised against 20 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 288 sessions in message queues are part of a published set of 7,852, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every message queues run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Laravel Queues: 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 Laravel Queues?
Yes. Laravel Queues was chosen in 20 of the 288 judged sessions in message queues, a 7% install share, ranking fourth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Laravel Queues?
In 8 of the 96 sessions in message queues run with Claude Code, which is 8%.
Do different coding agents treat Laravel Queues differently?
Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 6% and 8% of their runs.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 90 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 Laravel Queues considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 10 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 20. That is a 67% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 7,852 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 90 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.