Cline vs OpenCode
Two open-source AI coding agents that keep ending up on the same shortlist. Cline lives in your editor — VS Code first, with explicit Plan and Act modes and approve-every-step diffs. OpenCode lives in your terminal — a fast TUI with a client/server design and language-server awareness. Both are free, both are model-agnostic, both speak MCP. The split is mostly about where you want to work. Here is how to choose, with facts pulled from each project’s repo and docs.
On this page · 9 sections▾
TL;DR + decision line
Pick Cline if you work inside an editor; pick OpenCode if you work inside a terminal. That single sentence settles it for most people. The rest is detail.
- Editor-first? Install Cline. It runs as a VS Code extension (also JetBrains, Zed, and a standalone CLI) with a Plan mode that explores the codebase before it touches anything, and an Act mode that executes once you agree. Every file edit and command waits for your approval, with diffs you read in the editor.
- Terminal-first? Install OpenCode. It is a keyboard-driven TUI with a client/server architecture and language-server integration, built by the team behind it to be the agent you never have to leave the shell for.
- Can’t decide? They cost nothing and install in minutes, so run both for a week. Most engineers end up keeping one as the daily driver and reaching for the other on specific tasks.
Neither is a thin wrapper around a single model. Both are bring-your-own-key and provider-agnostic, so the choice is not about which LLM you get — it is about the interface you stare at all day. If you’re weighing these two against Claude Code, Aider, and Goose as well, jump to the five-way roundup that compares all of them at once.
What these coding agents do
Both Cline and OpenCode are agentic coding tools: you describe a change in natural language, the agent reads the relevant files, proposes edits, runs commands, and iterates until the task is done. They are not autocomplete. They take a goal (“add a rate limiter to the auth route and write a test for it”) and work through it across multiple files, calling tools as they go. The human stays in the loop by approving — or auto-approving — each step.
Where they diverge is the shell around that loop. Cline renders the work as an editor experience: a side panel, inline diffs, Plan/Act toggle, and an MCP marketplace a click away. OpenCode renders it as a terminal experience: a TUI you drive from the keyboard, a server process the client talks to, and config in a JSON file. Same job, two ergonomic philosophies. Both extend through the Model Context Protocol, so an agent in either tool can reach a database, a docs server, or a browser MCP without custom glue.
Side-by-side matrix
Every cell is sourced from each project’s repository and official docs. Star counts and exact provider lists move; the shapes below do not.
| Dimension | Cline | OpenCode |
|---|---|---|
| Primary interface | VS Code extension (also JetBrains, Zed, CLI) | Terminal TUI (also desktop + IDE extension) |
| Maintainer | Cline (cline/cline) | Anomaly (anomalyco/opencode) |
| License | Apache 2.0 | MIT |
| Model support | Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, OpenRouter, AWS Bedrock, Ollama, LM Studio | Any provider via API key (provider-agnostic) |
| Plan / Act modes | Yes — explicit Plan mode then Act mode | Single agentic loop (no separate plan toggle) |
| Approval model | Approve each edit/command, or auto-approve | Permission system per tool/agent |
| MCP support | Yes — in-editor marketplace + cline_mcp_settings.json | Yes — mcp block in opencode.json (local + remote) |
| Architecture | Editor extension + standalone CLI | Client/server with LSP integration |
| Cost (the tool) | Free, open source | Free, open source |
| MCP.Directory page | /clients/cline | /clients/opencode |
Two things stand out. First, the interface line is the real decision — an editor panel versus a terminal TUI — and almost everything else follows from it. Second, both are genuinely model-agnostic, so anyone claiming one “only works with Claude” is wrong; Cline ships a provider picker and OpenCode reads providers from config.
Cline — what it does best
What it does best
Cline is the strongest editor-native agent in this pair. Its signature is the Plan/Act split: in Plan mode it reads your codebase and proposes an approach before changing a single line; once you agree, Act mode executes it. Pair that with diffs you review inline and per-action approval, and you get an agent that is hard to surprise. It is the option that keeps a human firmly in the driver’s seat without slowing to a crawl.
Pick this if you...
- Live in VS Code (or JetBrains/Zed) and want the agent inside the editor, not in a separate window
- Want to read a plan and review diffs before any code lands — the Plan-then-Act flow is the headline reason people choose Cline
- Like a one-click MCP marketplace instead of hand-editing a config file every time you add a server
- Are newer to agentic coding and want guard rails: approve each step until you trust it, then flip on auto-approve
Where it shines: a guarded refactor in VS Code
You open the Cline panel, stay in Plan mode, and type “extract the Stripe webhook handler into its own module, add input validation, and write a Vitest test”. Cline reads the route, lists the files it intends to touch, and shows you the plan. You tweak one detail, switch to Act, and approve each diff as it appears in the editor — the new module, the validation, the test file. Nothing runs your test suite or edits a file without you seeing it first. For a change you care about getting right, that visibility is the whole point.
Skip it if...
You don’t want an editor in the loop at all. If your work is SSH sessions, tmux panes, and CI scripts, Cline’s CLI exists but the product’s center of gravity is the IDE — OpenCode is purpose-built for the terminal and will feel more at home there.
Setup, config path, and compatible servers: /clients/cline.
OpenCode — what it does best
What it does best
OpenCode is the terminal agent that doesn’t feel like a compromise. It runs as a TUI you drive from the keyboard, backed by a client/server architecture, with language-server integration so the agent has real symbol-level context instead of guessing from raw text. Because it is provider-agnostic and configured through a JSON file, the whole setup is reproducible and version-controllable — the agent, its providers, and its MCP servers can all live in your repo.
Pick this if you...
- Already work in a terminal-centric setup (tmux, SSH, remote dev boxes) and want the agent there, not in a GUI
- Want config-as-code: providers and MCP servers declared in
opencode.jsonand checked into version control - Value a fast, keyboard-only loop and the client/server design for driving the agent from scripts or a separate front end
- Want one terminal agent that can drive any model — Claude, GPT, Gemini, or a local model — without being tied to one vendor
Where it shines: an agent that lives on your dev box
You SSH into a remote machine, launch OpenCode in the repo, and point it at whichever provider your key allows. The agent reads code with language-server help, runs your build, and iterates — all inside the terminal you were already in, no port-forwarding a GUI back to your laptop. Add a database MCP server in the mcp block of opencode.json ("type": "local" for stdio, "type": "remote" for hosted) and commit it, and the next engineer who clones the repo gets the same agent setup for free.
Skip it if...
You want inline editor diffs and a point-and-click approval UI. OpenCode is a terminal product first; if reading changes in a proper editor view and toggling Plan/Act with a button is what you want, Cline is the better match. A TUI is fast, but it is still a TUI.
Setup, config path, and compatible servers: /clients/opencode.
Head-to-head: Cline vs OpenCode
Strip away the marketing and the comparison comes down to four practical questions.
Where do you want to work?
This is the whole ballgame. Editor → Cline. Terminal → OpenCode. Don’t overthink the rest until you’ve answered this one honestly about your own habits.
How much control do you want per step?
Cline’s Plan-then-Act with inline diff approval is the most explicit guard rail of the two. OpenCode has a per-tool permission system, but its loop is built for speed over ceremony. Want to read every change first? Cline.
Do you want config in version control?
OpenCode’s opencode.json makes the agent’s providers and MCP servers a committable artifact — great for teams that want a shared, reproducible setup. Cline’s marketplace is faster to click through but less “config as code.”
Which models matter to you?
Mostly a wash — both are model-agnostic. The nuance: Cline surfaces local runtimes (Ollama, LM Studio) directly in a picker, while OpenCode treats every provider the same way through config. If a friendly GUI for switching models matters, that leans Cline.
The community signal backs this up. The OP of a well-upvoted r/ ChatGPTCoding thread tried OpenCode after getting frustrated and summed up the trade-off cleanly:
“I'm trying OpenCode and it's not bad, although the integration with VS Code in Cline and Roo Code was significantly better than using the command line.”
u/ekerazha · Reddit
r/ChatGPTCoding — 'Cline and Roo Code are dying projects. Alternatives?' (55+ upvotes)
That is the trade-off in one sentence from someone who actually switched: OpenCode is a capable terminal agent, and Cline’s editor integration is the thing you give up when you move to the command line. Whether that is a downgrade depends entirely on where you prefer to work.
Is Cline dying?
The question comes from a specific, widely shared headline: “Cline and Roo Code are dying projects.” It deserves a straight answer, because it is the loudest thing people repeat about Cline right now.
The headline doesn’t survive contact with the repository. Cline’s GitHub is among the most active open-source coding-agent projects in 2026 — tens of thousands of stars, thousands of forks, and commits landing essentially every day. The release cadence is steady and the feature set keeps growing (the Plan/Act tour, the multi-IDE support, the CLI). A project shipping daily is not dying by any normal definition.
What is real is a sentiment shift. In that same thread, several developers said they had moved to Claude Code or Codex for the model harness, and the “everyone’s on Codex now” refrain shows up more than once. That is a preference for a different agent loop, not evidence that Cline stopped being maintained. Plenty of people pushed back in the comments — including the blunt counterpoint:
“I still use Cline exclusively. Why is it considered 'dying'?”
u/AdTotal4035 · Reddit
Reply in the same r/ChatGPTCoding thread
The honest read: Cline is actively developed and widely used, and the “dying” framing is more about a crowded, fast-moving market than about the project’s health. New agents launch constantly, attention rotates, and a tool can lose mindshare while still being shipped daily. If continuous IDE-native development is what you need, Cline is a safe pick. If you would rather drive any model from a terminal, that is a reason to try OpenCode — not a reason to declare Cline dead.
Frequently asked questions
Is Cline still maintained?
Yes. Cline's GitHub repository is one of the most active open-source coding-agent projects in 2026 — tens of thousands of stars, thousands of forks, and commits landing on a near-daily basis. A widely shared r/ChatGPTCoding thread titled "Cline and Roo Code are dying projects" sparked the question, but the repo's commit history and release cadence contradict the headline. Some users moved to Claude Code or Codex for the model harness; that is a preference shift, not abandonment. If you want continuous Plan/Act development inside an IDE, Cline is being shipped actively.
Does OpenCode work in VS Code?
OpenCode is primarily a terminal coding agent — its native interface is a TUI you run in your shell. The project describes itself as available as a terminal interface, a desktop app, or an IDE extension, so there is a VS Code path, but the terminal is where the product is strongest and most documented. If your whole workflow is anchored inside the VS Code editor panel with inline diffs and an IDE-native approval UI, Cline is the more natural fit. If you live in the terminal, OpenCode is built for exactly that.
Cline vs OpenCode for local LLMs?
Both are model-agnostic and bring-your-own-key, so both can drive a local model. Cline's model picker lists Ollama and LM Studio directly alongside Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, OpenRouter, and AWS Bedrock under its "Works With Every Model" configuration — useful if you want a GUI to switch providers. OpenCode lets you configure any provider via API keys in opencode.json, which suits a scripted, reproducible local setup. For a laptop running a quantized model through Ollama, both work; pick Cline if you want point-and-click provider switching, OpenCode if you want the config in version control.
Is OpenCode better than Cline?
Neither is strictly better — they optimize for different surfaces. OpenCode wins if you want a fast, keyboard-driven terminal agent with a client/server design and language-server awareness, and you are comfortable in a TUI. Cline wins if you want an IDE-native agent with explicit Plan and Act modes, inline diff review, and per-action human approval inside VS Code (now also JetBrains, Zed, and a standalone CLI). The honest answer most teams land on: OpenCode for terminal-first engineers, Cline for editor-first engineers. Many people run both depending on the task.
Do Cline and OpenCode both support MCP servers?
Yes, both speak the Model Context Protocol. Cline has first-class MCP support with an in-editor marketplace; its config lives in cline_mcp_settings.json (VS Code) or ~/.cline/mcp.json (CLI) using the standard mcpServers shape plus Cline's disabled and autoApprove fields. OpenCode adds MCP servers in the mcp block of opencode.json — "type": "local" with a command array for stdio servers, or "type": "remote" with a URL for hosted ones. See our setup pages for each: /clients/cline and /clients/opencode.
Is Cline or OpenCode free?
Both clients are free and open source — Cline under Apache 2.0, OpenCode under the MIT license. Neither charges for the agent itself. What costs money is the model you point it at: if you use a hosted API (Claude, GPT, Gemini), you pay that provider per token. Run a local model through Ollama and the marginal cost is your own hardware. There is no subscription gate on either tool to add MCP servers or run agentic loops.
Can OpenCode replace Claude Code?
For many terminal workflows, yes — OpenCode is provider-agnostic where Claude Code is tuned around Anthropic's models, so OpenCode is the choice if you want to drive GPT, Gemini, or a local model from a terminal agent. Claude Code's harness and tool-use loop are tightly integrated with Claude and some users prefer that polish. If you are evaluating all of them together, see /clients/claude-code and the five-way roundup linked below, which puts Goose, Cline, Aider, Claude Code, and OpenCode side by side.
Which is better for beginners, Cline or OpenCode?
Cline. If you already use VS Code, installing the Cline extension and toggling Plan mode gives you a guided, approve-each-step experience with visible diffs and no command-line setup. OpenCode assumes you are comfortable in a terminal and editing a JSON config file. Beginners ramp faster on Cline; engineers who already live in tmux and a shell often prefer OpenCode's speed once past the initial config.
Sources
Cline
- github.com/cline/cline — repo, README (Plan/Act, “Works With Every Model”), Apache 2.0
- docs.cline.bot — multi-IDE support, CLI, MCP
OpenCode
- github.com/anomalyco/opencode — repo, MIT
- opencode.ai/docs — terminal interface, providers, LSP servers, MCP config
Community
- r/ChatGPTCoding — “Cline and Roo Code are dying projects. Alternatives?” — the live debate, quoted above
Related
- /blog/goose-vs-cline-vs-aider-vs-claude-code-vs-opencode-2026 — the five-way roundup these two come from
- /clients/cline — Cline MCP setup guide
- /clients/opencode — OpenCode MCP setup guide
- /clients/claude-code — Claude Code MCP setup guide
- /blog/what-is-mcp — what the Model Context Protocol is