Does this solve indexing of codebases like Cursor does, or do you still need tools / plugins like Lumen (https://github.com/ory/lumen) for that in order to work in larger codebases without wasting tens of thousands of tokens on tool calls and brute force guessing with grep?

▲

luca-ctx 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

ctx sits around the agent harness, not in place of it.

So Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, etc keep their normal tools/capabilities rather than being reimplemented inside a new proprietary agent. If a harness has its own indexing/code-search story, you still get that; if it doesn’t, ctx doesn’t provide additional tools like codebase indexing.

The only additional tools we do provide are orchestration-related: - local merge queue for agents (submit your diff and make sure it lands cleanly on others) - agnostic subagents (for example, a Claude Code primary agent can invoke a Codex subagent)

▲

hmokiguess 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

how does lumen differ from serena? https://github.com/oraios/serena curious about it seems promising

▲

leetvibecoder 12 hours ago | parent [-]

Serena is more about text editing and better code search tooling while lumen is (a) chunking code with tree sitter and (b) storing embeddings (vectors) generated by an embedding model (ideally ones which are for code) which you then can search against. Effectively it‘s RAG for code made available as an MCP server.

This reduces tool calls (and thus saves times and tokens) because instead of „trying“ / „guessing“ names repeatedly, tools like claude code typically get useful search results on the first try.

Claude for example may search for „dbal“ via regex, but the function name is „sql“ - semantic search will find that while for regex, claude would try 3 additional guesses before it actually finds what its looking for. Hope this helps!

	▲	hmokiguess 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Oh thank you for the detailed response, that makes perfect sense, appreciate it and will certainly give it a try now!