Claude Code coordinates edits through Foremerge

At GPTree, naw103 ran coding agents in parallel worktrees and found that plans could conflict even when their patches did not touch the same lines. Replacing a class while another agent extended it was the motivating example. The team built Foremerge and reports using it in its development workflow.

Agents publish their intended change and affected scope before editing. A shared SQLite store returns related work and declared conflicts, while each agent retains its own worktree. Claude Code and Codex can use the same coordination store. When a high-severity conflict appears, agents exchange messages and record how it was resolved; claims are advisory, so the tool does not lock every overlapping scope.

The most useful result is qualified. The author replayed 76 intentions from a previous build, found one conflict and says Foremerge flagged it. Review also exposed a missed relationship when one agent claimed a class and another an internal method. That is evidence of both a working check and a real coverage gap.

A human configures the executable acceptance check. An agent's claim that tests passed does not satisfy that gate. The published account also notes missing push notifications and limits in comparing actual changes, so coordination still depends on agents declaring useful scopes and checking status.

Prompt
Suggested prompt (written by Agents In Use, not the author's)

Source: Hacker News · naw103 / GPTree