loading
Loading.loading
Loading.Buying more Claude or Cursor seats gets your team a better copilot: autocomplete and in-editor Q&A, roughly 10% of what these models can do. Agents running real work in production are a different problem. That jump needs context the agents can navigate, observability, and developers trained to run fleets, none of which ship in a license. You can try it in-house; tsukumo gets you there faster than trial-and-error, on your stack.
Updated
| tsukumo | More Claude seats / staying in-house | |
|---|---|---|
| What you get | Agents running real work in production | Autocomplete and in-editor Q&A (the copilot floor) |
| The missing layer | Context, observability, operators, built in | Not in the license; you assemble it yourself |
| Token economics | Agents reread one canonical source instead of re-reading raw docs each call; the suite we run measures ~60% fewer tokens per lookup | Seats are flat-rate because they stop at autocomplete; the token bill only appears the day you actually run agents, and then it is unmanaged |
| Repeatable work | Settled, recurring work runs as deterministic scripts with no model in the loop, so re-running it costs no tokens | No such layer; in-editor assistance runs back through the model every time |
| Path | A guided transition on your stack | DIY trial-and-error, on your own time |
| Risk | Guardrails and review gates your seniors trust | Ungoverned agent use, or stalling at autocomplete |
If you have a strong team with real slack to learn, tolerance for slow trial-and-error, and someone who'll own the operating layer, you can get there in-house, and plenty of teams do. We're honest about that. We're worth it when you want to skip the trial-and-error and have the whole team operating agents sooner, in production.
or have us build it — same capability, the other door
Related answers