Compared

Murmell vs Claude Code on the web

This is the one comparison on the site where the other tool is also inside the product. Murmell launches the Claude Code CLI on its own machines, so the question is never Murmell or Claude Code. It is where your Claude Code runs, and whether anybody else can see it running.

What Claude Code already does

Anthropic describes the CLI as available “in your terminal, IDE, desktop app, and browser”, and the browser version runs “on Anthropic-managed cloud infrastructure”. You point it at a repository, it clones the code, works, and pushes a branch. The documentation is explicit about the shape of that machine: “each session runs in an isolated, Anthropic-managed VM”, and “code is analyzed and modified within isolated VMs before creating PRs”.

That isolation is the right design for the thing it does. A task you start and walk away from should not be able to touch anything you did not hand it, and a pull request is a clean place for finished work to wait. You can run several tasks at once, and each one gets its own machine and its own branch.

Where Murmell sits differently

Murmell removes the copies. Several agents run on one cloud machine, in one checkout, and an agent claims a path before it writes to it. The board keeps one holder per path and refuses everybody else until that holder lets go. Nothing has to be merged at the end because nothing forked at the start.

The second difference is who is in the room. A Murmell canvas is multiplayer while the work happens: the windows, the terminal output and the named cursors move under everybody at once. Anthropic is precise about the web equivalent, and the sentence is worth reading closely. Recipients of a shared session “see the latest state when they open the link, but their view doesn’t update in real time”. A link to a session is a report. A canvas is a room.

The third is the agent you are allowed to bring. Murmell is not tied to one vendor: Claude Code, Codex, Kimi and OpenCode run in the same canvas, on the same directory, reserving files from the same board. Two agents from two companies can work on one feature in the same hour.

Where Claude Code wins

Everywhere the work is yours alone, which is most of the time. The terminal, the IDE extensions, the desktop app and the phone are all one engine, and a session follows you between them. Nothing in Murmell competes with typing claude in a project you already have checked out.

Isolation also wins whenever the task should be quarantined. Anthropic keeps git credentials out of the sandbox entirely and handles authentication “through a secure proxy using scoped credentials”. If the job is to let an agent loose on something you have not read yet, a private VM that can only ever produce a pull request is the safer container.

Which to pick

Use Claude Code on its own when one agent is enough and the output belongs in a branch you review later.

Use Murmell when several agents have to touch the same files in the same hour, when the useful thing is a colleague watching the run rather than reading the diff afterwards, or when the agents come from more than one vendor. The CLI is the same either way. See how Murmell runs it.