AOSplaneCompareLinear
Linear’s coding agent vs AOSplane
Linear’s cloud coding agent already turns an issue into a draft pull request, and it already uses Claude Code or Codex. Copilot’s cloud agent can be assigned on a Linear issue and open a pull request too. Starting from the ticket is not the difference. The difference is who reviews first, and what caps the spend. Facts below are from Linear’s cloud coding agent doc and GitHub’s Linear integration doc, as read on 11 November 2026.
- Hard spend cap per task
- Linear and Jira
- Claude Code and Codex
6 sections · 3 min read
On this page6 sections
What Linear’s agent does
Linear’s doc says you delegate a well-scoped issue and the agent writes and tests the change in a secure cloud environment, then returns a draft pull request. Teammates with repository access follow the session, add context, steer it, and review the diff in Linear. GitHub’s permissions and review requirements still decide what ships.
Asking Linear to fix a bug, implement a feature, open a pull request, or start a coding session makes it start working right away. Asking it to investigate, research, or plan does not start coding. It can run the app in the cloud, use a browser, and attach screenshots or recordings. The review itself happens in Linear’s Reviews tab, where people on the team inspect the diff.
The agent is on Free, Basic, Business, and Enterprise. Legacy plans are not supported. Usage draws from the workspace’s AI credits. Model tokens and sandbox runtime are charged separately. Runtime is billed in 20-minute increments, and the doc lists a runtime cost of $0.125, $0.25, and $0.50 for small, medium, and large sandboxes. Admins review spending and manage spend limits in Settings, Usage and limits. Those limits are real. They sit on the workspace credit balance the sessions draw from.
Copilot on the same issue
GitHub’s integration doc is a second path inside Linear. Assign GitHub Copilot on the issue, or mention @GitHub. Copilot captures the description and the comments, stores that context on the pull request, and links a pull request from the issue. It requires a paid Copilot plan. The pull request is still Copilot’s for you to review. Credit behavior for that session is Copilot’s, described on the Copilot comparison.
What AOSplane does before the team looks
AOSplane can start from the same Linear issue, or from a Jira Cloud issue, and the gate does not change with the tracker or with the harness. Claude Code and Codex both go through it. With Plan first, the product manager writes a spec and you approve it before code. Review reads the diff. QA runs the repository’s commands and treats the exit code as the result. The draft pull request opens after that, with the spec, the review notes, QA’s results, and the cost of the task.
The spend cap is on the task. The organization, the project, and the agent each have a limit. The tightest one wins. If the reservation would cross it, that task does not start. It does not draw a workspace credit balance down and leave the next issue to discover the empty pool. Linear’s spend limits are the right tool when you want one balance for the workspace. They are a different shape.
Side by side
| Linear’s cloud coding agent | AOSplane | |
|---|---|---|
| From an issue | A draft pull request. The team reviews the diff in Linear. | A draft pull request after a spec, a review, and QA. The team is not first. |
| Harness | Claude Code or Codex, per Linear’s doc. The workspace default model applies to later coding work. | Claude Code or Codex, chosen per agent. The gate is the same for both. |
| Tests | The agent writes and tests, and can attach screenshots or recordings. | QA runs the repository’s commands. Exit code 0 is the pass. The agent’s say-so is not. |
| Spend | Workspace AI credits. Admins set spend limits on that balance. Runtime is billed in 20-minute increments. | A hard cap on the task, checked before it starts. The cost is on the record with the pull request. |
| Also from Jira | This doc is the Linear agent. Copilot documents a separate Jira integration. | The same loop. Jira does not get a lesser gate. |
When Linear’s agent is the better fit
- The team already reviews in Linear and wants the diff, the issue, and the session in that tab.
- A workspace AI credit balance, with spend limits on that balance, is the control you want.
- You want Linear to take a first pass at triage bugs and hand a draft to an engineer.
When AOSplane is the better fit
- The engineer should not be the first reviewer. Scope, review, and QA should already have run.
- Jira tickets and Linear issues should hit the same gate, on Claude Code or on Codex.
- One task should have a hard cap, rather than sharing a workspace credit balance. How that cap is set.
- The Linear side of the setup is starting AOSplane from an issue. The proof steps are review and QA.
Linear’s behavior, plans, credit balance, sandbox prices, and spend settings are from Linear’s cloud coding agent doc. Copilot on a Linear issue is from GitHub’s Linear integration. Both were read on 11 November 2026 and may have changed. Linear and GitHub Copilot are not AOSplane products.