Skip to content
Agents tracked: 258 Downloads (7d): 219M up 6.1% GitHub stars: 5.5M VS Code installs: 148M Releases (7d): 293 Agent status: 2 with issues Updated Oct 7, 2026
Showcase Ghostty (Mitchell Hashimoto)

Mitchell Hashimoto builds a non-trivial Ghostty feature with Amp

Ghostty's creator walked through the agent sessions he used to build in-window, non-intrusive update notifications for the macOS app, including the planning, the dead ends and the cleanup.

The problem

Most AI coding demos are toy projects. This one shows an experienced maintainer shipping a real feature in a large production codebase with an agent, and where human judgment still mattered.

How they did it

  1. Start by writing a full plan interactively with the agent before any code.
  2. Hand the agent well-scoped fill-in-the-blank tasks, steering and reviewing as it goes.
  3. Finish with cleanup sessions, especially of the view model between UI and logic.

Results

  • The work took a total of 16 separate sessions totalling $15.98 in token spend on Amp.
  • The author warns never to ship AI-written code without a thorough manual review.

As reported by the source (Mitchell Hashimoto's blog); AgentGid did not measure these figures.

Takeaway. Plan with the agent first, have it fill in the details, and review everything before merging.
AgentGid's take

This suits an experienced developer who already knows their codebase well enough to write a plan, scope tasks and catch bad output, since the human judgment is what keeps the sessions cheap. Watch the $15.98 figure: it's one author's spend on Amp, and Amp ranks 21st in its category with a Gid Score of 31, so expect different results elsewhere. Pi (Free, OSS) is a no-cost alternative, with only model provider costs.

The agent used here

Similar use cases