Do coding agents recommend LiveKit Agents?
LiveKit Agents was chosen in 13% of 754 judged voice agents sessions, ranking fourth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code.
LiveKit Agents was chosen in 13% of 754 judged voice agents sessions, ranking fourth. It was also raised as a candidate in 197 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in voice agents inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about LiveKit Agents. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | Voice agents |
| Sessions in the category | 754 |
| Sessions where LiveKit Agents was chosen | 98 |
| Install share | 13% |
| Rank in category | 4 of 32 |
| Codebases it won in | 8 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 197 |
| Chosen when considered | 33% |
| Site | livekit.io |
By agent
The agents treat LiveKit Agents very differently. Cursor chose it in 20% of its sessions in this category and Grok Build CLI in 5%, a spread of 15 points.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose LiveKit Agents | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 157 | 24 | 15% |
| Codex | 217 | 24 | 11% |
| Cursor | 167 | 33 | 20% |
| Grok Build CLI | 60 | 3 | 5% |
| Muse Code | 153 | 14 | 9% |
A single blended install share would report the midpoint and hide both ends. If most of your users run Grok Build CLI, your real position here is 5%, not 13%.
By who was asking
LiveKit Agents does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 23% of sessions asked as enterprise team and 0% of those asked as vibe coder.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose LiveKit Agents | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 134 | 0 | 0% |
| Junior developer | 90 | 6 | 7% |
| Senior engineer | 322 | 44 | 14% |
| Enterprise team | 208 | 48 | 23% |
What LiveKit Agents was up against
The full ranking in voice agents, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Retell AI | 168 | 22% |
| 2 | Vapi | 124 | 16% |
| 3 | Twilio ConversationRelay | 99 | 13% |
| 4 | LiveKit Agents (this page) | 98 | 13% |
| 5 | ElevenLabs Agents | 59 | 8% |
| 6 | OpenAI Realtime API | 49 | 6% |
| 7 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 35 | 5% |
| 8 | Grok Voice Think Fast 2.0 | 29 | 4% |
What this means
LiveKit Agents was raised in 197 sessions and chosen in 98. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough.
Where these numbers come from
The 754 sessions in voice agents are part of a published set of 15,287, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every voice agents run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on LiveKit 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 LiveKit Agents?
Yes. LiveKit Agents was chosen in 98 of the 754 judged sessions in voice agents, a 13% install share, ranking fourth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend LiveKit Agents?
In 24 of the 157 sessions in voice agents run with Claude Code, which is 15%.
Do different coding agents treat LiveKit Agents differently?
Yes, and by a wide margin. Cursor chose it in 20% of its runs and Grok Build CLI in 5%.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 110 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 LiveKit Agents considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 197 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 98. That is a 33% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 15,287 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 110 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.