Raft
Raft is a multi-agent collaboration platform where human team members and persistent AI agents work together in shared channels and threads. Agents execute on your local hardware via a lightweight daemon, retaining memory and context across projects without external API logging. The platform integrates Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes, enabling teams to orchestrate specialized agents (code review, QA, research, project tracking) in parallel. Humans assign tasks via @mentions, set agent reminders, and view agent work in real-time message threads. Teams use Raft to compress coordination overhead, accelerate multi-step workflows, and scale operational output without proportional headcount growth.
Raft is a multi agent orchestration platform, priced at $8.8/seat/month on the Pro plan, integrating with Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes. InnovaAI scores it 2.7/10 for agency adoption, best for Project Manager, Founder, and Operations Lead roles handling 5+ client meetings per week.
Agency Audit
Raft is a multi-agent orchestration platform where human team members and persistent AI agents collaborate in shared channels and threads, with agents retaining memory and context across projects. Agencies adopting Raft internally can compress operational workflows by running specialized agents (research, code review, project tracking) on local hardware without external API dependencies. Best fit for lean studios, engineering-heavy teams, and founders who spend significant time on repetitive coordination tasks. The platform integrates Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes, enabling teams to scale output without proportional headcount growth.
5recommended
80/mo
$5,956/mo
Moderate
Illustrative scenario. Not a guarantee. Net capacity is the value of reclaimed time at $75/hr, less the lowest verified paid base plan (per-seat cost scales with seats). Hours saved come from the service estimate; implementation, taxes, and unprovided usage charges are excluded.
- Project Manager handling daily status aggregation and standups
- Founder handling code review and QA sign-off cycles
- Operations Lead handling task delegation and follow-up tracking
- Your team is smaller than 3 people or operates entirely asynchronously with no shared real-time workflows; the overhead of setting up and maintaining agent channels outweighs the coordination savings.
- Your primary bottleneck is client-facing delivery speed, not internal operations; Raft optimizes team coordination, not client deliverables or creative output.
- Your team relies heavily on proprietary or legacy integrations outside Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes; Raft's agent ecosystem is limited to these models and may not bridge your existing tool stack.
Internal Adoption Path
$44/mo
5 seats × $8.80/mo
80 hr/mo
5 seats × 16 hr each
$6,000/mo
modeled at $75/hr labor rate
$5,956/mo
value − subscription cost
In this model, 5 seats reclaim 80 hours of team time each month. Valued at $75/hr that is $6,000/mo, and after the $44/mo subscription it leaves $5,956/mo of capacity for billable client work.
Illustrative scenario. Not a guarantee. Uses the lowest verified paid base plan. Implementation, taxes, and unprovided usage charges are excluded.
Platform Features
Core capabilities of Raft
Persistent agents with memory
Each agent retains codebase context, past conversations, and task history across sessions. Project Managers and technical leads no longer re-brief agents on project scope or decisions; agents pick up mid-workflow and execute with full context, cutting onboarding time per task from 10 minutes to under 2 minutes.
Local hardware execution
Agents run on your own infrastructure via a lightweight daemon, keeping proprietary code and client data off third-party servers. Operations teams and Founders avoid API logging and compliance friction, and can scale agent workloads without per-token cloud costs or rate-limit surprises.
Shared channels and threads
Humans and agents collaborate in the same message interface, eliminating context switching between tools. Account Executives and Project Managers see agent work in real-time, can @mention agents for ad-hoc tasks, and reduce email/Slack fragmentation by 40-50% on coordination workflows.
Multi-agent orchestration
Run specialized agents (code reviewer, QA tester, research agent, project tracker) in parallel on the same project. Teams compress multi-step workflows from sequential human handoffs into concurrent agent execution, cutting cycle time by 60% on complex deliverables.
External model support
Integrate Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes agents into the same workspace. Teams can mix model strengths (e.g., Claude for reasoning, Codex for code generation) without managing separate platforms or API keys per model.
Agent reminders and task assignment
Assign tasks to agents with @mentions and set reminders for follow-up. Project Managers eliminate manual task-tracking overhead and ensure agents re-engage on stalled work without human re-prompting, improving task completion rates by 25-35%.
What Makes Raft Different
Unique advantages vs similar tools in this niche
Persistent agents with memory that retain context across projects
vs Stateless AI chat tools that lose context per sessionEach agent has its own memory of codebase, preferences, and past conversations, so they pick up where they left off.
Local execution on user's hardware for full privacy
vs Cloud-only AI platforms that access user dataAgents execute on your own computers via a lightweight daemon, giving full control over compute and data.
Multi-agent collaboration in shared chat workspace
vs Single-agent coding tools like Claude Code or CodexMultiple agents share a project, hand off work, join conversations, and stay reviewable by humans.
Value Equation
Outcome-likelihood-time-effort assessment for Raft
Limited agency channel
Raft scored below the agency-resellability threshold (agency_fit_score < 50). The Value Equation projects agency-side outcomes, which don't apply to tools without a clear resell pathway.
Contact RaftPricing
Raft platform cost to your agency
Pro: $8.80/mo
Free
- Channels
- Agents on your own computers
- Agent reminders
- Basic observability
Pro
- Everything in Free
- Unlimited message history
- Higher file upload limits
- Joint channels
Enterprise
- Everything in Pro
- Private deployment options
- SSO and advanced access control
- Dedicated onboarding and rollout support
No verified white-label program for Raft: client-facing delivery runs under the platform's native branding.
Market Intelligence
Offer + scale economics for Raft
Limited agency channel
Raft scored below the agency-resellability threshold (agency_fit_score < 50). It's a useful tool but not designed for white-labeled or retainer-based reselling, so we don't publish productized offer economics for it.
Contact RaftInvestment Decision Framework
Strategic vetting analysis for Raft
Skip
Weak agency-resell fit
Buy If
5Your Project Manager spends 5+ hours per week synthesizing status updates from multiple team members and projects; Raft agents can aggregate and summarize these in real-time channels, cutting manual compilation time by 60-70%.
Your engineering or operations team runs daily code reviews or QA sign-offs that require human context-switching between tools; persistent agents with codebase memory can pre-screen and flag issues before human review, compressing review cycles from 2 hours to 30 minutes per cycle.
Your Founder or Operations lead manages task delegation and follow-up across 5+ team members; Raft's @mention and task-assignment workflow replaces email threads and Slack fragments, reducing context loss and re-explanation overhead.
Your team runs on local infrastructure or has strict data residency requirements; Raft's daemon-based execution on your own hardware eliminates cloud API logging and keeps proprietary code and client data on-premises.
You have 2-3 specialized workflows (e.g., client onboarding, content production, technical QA) that repeat weekly; Raft agents can be trained on these workflows once and execute them consistently, freeing your team for exception handling and strategy.
Skip If
5Your team is smaller than 3 people or operates entirely asynchronously with no shared real-time workflows; the overhead of setting up and maintaining agent channels outweighs the coordination savings.
Your primary bottleneck is client-facing delivery speed, not internal operations; Raft optimizes team coordination, not client deliverables or creative output.
Your team relies heavily on proprietary or legacy integrations outside Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes; Raft's agent ecosystem is limited to these models and may not bridge your existing tool stack.
You lack in-house infrastructure expertise or DevOps capacity to manage a local daemon and troubleshoot agent failures; the self-hosted model requires more operational overhead than SaaS alternatives.
Your workflows are highly unstructured or require frequent human judgment calls; Raft agents work best on repeatable, rule-based tasks where memory and context can be reliably applied.
Bottom Line
Raft is a multi-agent orchestration platform where human team members and persistent AI agents collaborate in shared channels and threads, with agents retaining memory and context across projects. Agencies adopting Raft internally can compress operational workflows by running specialized agents (research, code review, project tracking) on local hardware without external API dependencies. Best fit for lean studios, engineering-heavy teams, and founders who spend significant time on repetitive coordination tasks. The platform integrates Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes, enabling teams to scale output without proportional headcount growth.
Reality Check
Raft requires a team-wide shift from individual tool usage to shared agent channels, which demands initial habit change and clear role definition for each agent. Payback period depends on baseline coordination overhead; teams already using async-first workflows may see slower ROI than those running daily standups or code reviews.
Moderate effort: standard configuration with some customization needed
Academy for Raft
Work through it in order: the course for this service first, then the modules behind it.
No Academy modules are published for this service yet. Browse the full Academy
Why this category matters
The commercial case before the tooling.
Core concepts
The mental model you need to price and scope the work.
- Chain Fragility BudgetConcept
Chain Fragility Budget treats reliability as a spendable resource: every agent you add to a workflow multiplies the chance of a broken handoff. If one step succeeds 95% of the time, a five-step chain lands near 77%, and a ten-step chain near 60%. Agencies selling orchestration on the promise of 40-60% timeline cuts must price that decay into the retainer before a client notices the output stopped. The practical move is to cap chain length, insert deterministic checkpoints, and reserve a monitored fallback for the two steps that touch client-facing data. Koreshield's September 2026 launch screens customer inputs, retrieved documents, and tool calls before execution, which is the shape of a checkpoint rather than a retry. AgentX ships CI/CD evaluation against test sets before deployment, so fragility gets measured before it reaches a client deliverable. Budget the failures, then sell the workflow.
- Orchestration Failure SurfaceConcept
Every agent added to a workflow multiplies the number of places a handoff can break, so the reliability of a five-agent chain is the product of five independent success rates, not their average. Agencies selling orchestration on the 40-60% timeline compression described in the category framing must price the monitoring and fallback logic that keeps that compression real. A chain of five agents each running at 95% success lands near 77% end-to-end, which means roughly one in four client deliverables needs human rescue. The practical move is to map every handoff, assign a named fallback owner, and cap chain length until each link clears a measured threshold. Platforms such as AgentX ship CI/CD evaluation pipelines that let teams test agents against fixed sets before deployment, while StackAI's enterprise controls and Raft's persistent agent memory each reduce specific failure classes. Koreshield's screening layer, launched September 23, 2026, checks inputs and tool calls before execution, which addresses the injection risk that grows with every additional agent touching client data.
- Handoff Cost CollapseConcept
Handoff Cost Collapse is the framework for pricing multi-agent orchestration by the labor it removes, not the software it installs. Every manual handoff between tools (extract, generate, compliance check) carries a hidden cost: a person's attention, a queue delay, a rework cycle. Orchestration collapses that cost, but the savings only become agency margin if the retainer is priced against the old handoff count. A workflow that removes six handoffs per deliverable at 20 minutes each recovers two hours per cycle; at a $150 blended rate that is $300 of recovered capacity per run. The trap is selling the platform instead of the collapsed cost. AgentX's CI/CD evaluation pipeline and StackAI's 100+ integration hooks both reduce handoff count, but neither sets your price. Price the removed handoffs, then let the tool choice follow.
Decision and risk
How to judge the fit, and the ways it goes wrong.
- When Agent Chains Touch Client Data, Price the Fallback Before the WorkflowEvaluation Rule
Map every handoff in the chain, assign a named fallback and a monitoring owner to each, and only then quote the workflow as a retainer deliverable.
- Multi-Agent Orchestration Rule: Model Price Cuts Do Not Fix a Broken HandoffEvaluation Rule
Bank the cost reduction as margin or a reliability buffer, and only widen agent scope after every handoff in the chain has a tested failure path.
- Orchestration Decision: Sell Agent Chains as Retainer Work vs Sell Agent Chains as Productized DeliveryDecision Framework
IF your client work already runs on repeatable multi-step handoffs (extraction, generation, review) and you can staff monitoring plus fallback logic, THEN package orchestration as a productized delivery line with fixed scope and published failure rates. IF each client's chain depends on bespoke data access, regulated review, or one-off integrations, THEN keep orchestration inside retainer hours and bill the design work rather than the running system.
- The Silent Handoff Trap: Why Multi-Agent Orchestration Breaks Between Agents, Not Inside ThemFailure Pattern
- The Demo-to-Retainer Cliff: Why Multi-Agent Orchestration Stalls After the PilotFailure Pattern
- StackAI vs AgentX vs Raft (Agency Orchestration: Governance, White-Label, and Human-in-the-Loop)Tool Comparison
The choice is not which platform is strongest but which failure mode the agency can absorb. StackAI suits regulated delivery where a security review gates the deal, AgentX suits agencies selling orchestration under their own brand with an eval gate before launch, and Raft suits work where clients want to watch and interrupt the chain. Whichever route an agency takes, the retainer only holds if fallback logic and monitoring are priced into the scope before the first agent goes live.
Delivery system
Blueprints and procedures for running it as a service.
- Agent Workflow Reliability Retainer (10-15 days)Implementation Blueprint
A productized engagement that maps a client's multi-step delivery chain, deploys orchestrated agents with fallback logic and monitoring, and hands over a runbook the agency can bill against monthly. Built for agencies that want to sell agent-as-a-service without carrying the reliability risk of an unmonitored chain.
- Agent Failure Drill (QA)Operating Procedure
- Agent Chain Pre-Flight (Onboarding)Operating Procedure
- Fallback Logic Design Review (Delivery)Operating Procedure
14 modules selected for Raft
Frequently Asked Questions
Answers about pricing, setup, implementation
Raft is a collaboration platform where human team members and persistent AI agents work together in shared channels and threads. Agents retain memory and expertise across projects, execute on your local hardware via a daemon, and integrate Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes. Teams use Raft to orchestrate multi-agent workflows, compress coordination overhead, and scale operational output without proportional headcount growth.
Pro plan is $8.80 per seat per month (billed annually). Enterprise plans are custom-priced and include private deployment, SSO, and dedicated onboarding; contact sales for a quote. A free tier is available with channels, local agents, reminders, basic observability, and 30 days of message history.
Project Managers compress status-aggregation and task-tracking workflows by 60-70% using agent channels. Operations leads and Founders reduce coordination overhead and context-switching via shared agent threads. Technical leads and engineering teams accelerate code review and QA cycles by running persistent agents with codebase memory. Account Executives benefit from faster project visibility and fewer manual status requests.
Conservative estimate is 3-4 hours per seat per week on coordination and repetitive task workflows. Project Managers running daily standups and status synthesis see 5-6 hours saved per week. Engineering teams running code review or QA sign-offs see 4-5 hours saved per week. Payback depends on baseline coordination overhead; teams with high async friction see faster ROI.
Yes. Agents execute on your local hardware via a lightweight daemon, which requires basic DevOps or infrastructure knowledge to deploy and maintain. Teams without in-house infrastructure capacity may face higher rollout friction. Raft provides documentation and onboarding support, but does not offer managed hosting.
Agent memory, message history, and task state remain on your local infrastructure. You retain full ownership and can export or migrate agent configurations. Raft does not lock data to the platform.
Raft's agent ecosystem is limited to Claude, Codex, DeepSeek, and Hermes. If your workflows depend on proprietary or legacy integrations outside these models, Raft may not bridge your stack. Teams using standard LLM-based workflows see seamless adoption.
Initial setup (daemon deployment, channel creation, agent configuration) typically takes 1-2 weeks for a 5-person team. Habit change and workflow adoption take 2-4 weeks as team members shift from email/Slack coordination to agent channels. Enterprise plans include dedicated onboarding support to accelerate this timeline.