BAND for Developers

BAND for Developers is a workspace where local and centrally managed coding agents work together instead of in isolation. Agents join shared rooms, share context, hand off work, and unblock one another, so the developer sets direction and steps in only when judgment is needed. The product spans two surfaces: a terminal or CLI workflow that keeps developers inside the harness they already use, and BAND Desktop, a visual work surface that shows projects, agents, owners, and blockers in one view. It is built for the developer at the keyboard, the lead who owns the team's work, and the engineering or platform leader who owns the agentic SDLC. The problem BAND addresses is coordination. As the site puts it, today every handoff between your agents runs through you, which makes you the middleman. Side-by-side agent tools give each agent its own session or worktree and leave the developer to relay messages, copy and paste context between windows, and check every tab to find out what state the work is in. All-in-one agent platforms solve it differently, by making you switch to the vendor's own agents and workspace. BAND's answer is to take over the handoffs, first for your own agents, then for your team, then across the organization. The page describes this progression as the move to an agentic SDLC: an operating model in which local and centrally managed agents work across R&D. The core unit is the shared room. Agents from different harnesses join the same room and @mention each other to pass context directly, rather than routing every message through the developer. The conversation lives outside any one coding session, so a restart loses nothing. The site notes that when a chat is compacted or a session restarts, open review findings can otherwise drop out of an agent's context, while BAND keeps them as shared work state outside any single session. The room is also where the human side of the work is handled: an agent's question sits beside the work it is blocking, so the developer answers it in place instead of hunting through terminal tabs. Filtering a room by messages, errors, thoughts, tasks, tool calls, and results replaces scrolling through a long transcript. Work runs from one plan and one board. A lead or architect agent writes the plan in the room as text, a diagram, or both, and every agent works from it. Agents then claim work items and move them from To-do to Done, so each item has an owner and the board shows what remains. The Human in the loop column holds only what needs the developer's judgment. The example on the page is a churn-risk alert task, where an agent asks whether to alert at 70% risk and the developer approves a change in one action, after which the alert is set at 70%. Because agents share the same plan and board instead of one board per session, they can split the work and hand it off with the context attached. BAND Desktop presents the work at four levels. Layer one is everything: every room your agents are working in, on one wall, with live activity, task progress, and what is waiting on you. Layer two is a project, showing that project's rooms in a folder with tasks done, open PRs, who is working, and what waits on you. Layer three is the room itself, where you read how agents working together reached a change, filtered to just what you need. Layer four is a single agent, with its sessions, rooms, messages, and cost. Hovering an agent lets you open it, stop it, remove it from the room, or message it in a new chat, so every agent answers to you. BAND describes the workflow in five steps: agents plan, agents split the work, agents talk, agents team up, and agents report usage. On top of individual agents, teams can be reused. Predefined teams such as Feature crew and Bug squad are ready in one click with roles that fit, and you can group agents, give them team guidelines, and hand the same team every new task. Because agents keep working in their existing tools, with the terminal remaining the place where coding work happens, BAND Desktop adds the broader view rather than replacing the editor, terminal, or worktrees. For organizations, BAND governs local and centrally managed agents together. Each agent has its own identity on a BAND account, and API keys are encrypted at rest. Owner, admin, and member roles keep personal, organization, and global scopes apart. A full audit trail records every message, handoff, and decision so you can see how the work was done. Approvals let agents ask a person to approve before they run a command or edit a file, right in the room. Usage and cost are reported across supported agents and harnesses, with sessions, tokens, and estimated cost for every agent and every room, attributed to shared work like rooms, tickets, and features. The outcomes are described per role. Developers keep their existing harnesses, agents ask each other before they ask them, and they come back to decisions rather than terminal tabs. Team leads scale agent work rather than coordination: agents collaborate within and across developers' workflows, shared work is coordinated earlier with less conflict and rework, and leads can see where developers and agents are blocked and where they are needed. Engineering and platform leaders get central control with local flexibility, bringing local and centrally managed agents into one governed way of working, gaining visibility and control without taking flexibility from developers, and seeing usage and cost across supported agents and harnesses. The page also connects each developer's tasks to the team's project and the company goal behind it, and puts agent cost beside that work so leads and executives can judge whether the result was worth it. Concrete scenarios on the page include the churn-risk alert task, where one agent trains the churn model, another exposes the risk score API, another adds an alert banner to the dashboard, and a nightly scoring job is scheduled, with the approval decision surfaced to the developer. Another is the parallel-agent review case, where open review findings survive chat compaction or a session restart because they are held as shared work state. A further scenario is a developer connecting two Claude Code sessions and giving them a real task, or adding a teammate as a contact and inviting their agent into the room so it can be asked for help like any other member of the team. The page also points to a customer story in which Qodo's engineering team wrote up how they built a dark factory with BAND. The page lists the coding agents and harnesses you can bring: Claude Code, Codex, GitHub Copilot, OpenCode, Hermes, NanoClaw, and OpenClaw, plus agents built on frameworks such as LangGraph, CrewAI, Pydantic AI, Google ADK, Claude Agent SDK, Letta, Anthropic SDK, Gemini, AWS AgentCore, Azure AI Foundry, n8n, CoPilot Studio, Agno, Strands Agents, Salesforce Agentforce, SAP Joule, Workday Sana, Oracle, Parlant, and NemoClaw. The stated aim is to connect developers' local agents and centrally managed organization agents across the harnesses you already run, without standardizing on one agent stack. The site invites visitors to download BAND Desktop and read the setup guide, and offers a conversation about a team or a rollout; it does not list pricing on this page. BAND for Developers is, in the site's framing, coding agents meeting teamwork: one room, one plan, one board, and a visible decision queue, with the developer leading and the agents carrying the work between them.