Agentic development isn’t a buzzword anymore. In the last week, Google launched Gemini 3 and a new IDE called Antigravity in public preview, while GitHub’s Agent HQ—announced at Universe ’25—set itself up as the neutral orchestration layer for coding agents across vendors. Both moves aim at the same outcome: let developers work at the task level while autonomous agents plan, code, test, and verify. The question is which path your team should take first. (blog.google)
What changed this month (and why it matters)
On November 18, 2025, Google unveiled Gemini 3—its most capable model to date—and released Antigravity, an agent‑first development environment for Windows, macOS, and Linux at no charge during public preview. Antigravity elevates AI agents to first‑class citizens with access to the editor, terminal, and a built‑in browser, and it’s designed to generate verifiable “artifacts” of what agents do. (blog.google)
Three weeks earlier at GitHub Universe, Microsoft/GitHub introduced Agent HQ: a “mission control” for running and governing multiple coding agents—from Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Cognition, xAI, and more—inside the GitHub flow (Web, mobile, CLI, and VS Code). It promises enterprise guardrails, Plan Mode in VS Code, and custom agents defined in version‑controlled AGENTS.md files. Availability rolls out to paid Copilot subscribers over the coming months. (github.blog)
Agentic development, defined
Traditional AI coding tools autocomplete lines or suggest patches. Agentic development shifts the unit of work from lines of code to tasks with goals and constraints. You describe the outcome; agents propose a plan, create branches, modify code, run tests, and report results with evidence (tests, logs, screenshots).
Why this matters now: the model quality and the scaffolding around it (identity, permissions, observability, and change control) finally exist in mainstream tools. Done well, agentic development reduces developer time spent on glue work—scaffolding, rote migrations, boilerplate, experiment setup—and lets humans stay focused on architecture, tradeoffs, and product fit.
Google Antigravity: strengths, surprises, and gotchas
Antigravity is Google’s opinionated bet: an agent‑first IDE powered by Gemini 3. Two core surfaces stand out. First, the Editor view that looks like a familiar IDE with agents riding shotgun. Second, the Manager view in which you orchestrate multiple agents across workspaces—closer to a project board than a text editor. Agents have controlled access to the editor, terminal, and a headless browser, and they output artifacts—plans, diffs, recordings—that make actions auditable. (theverge.com)
Fresh details worth noting: it’s public preview and currently free to download, which lowers friction for pilots. Because Antigravity ships alongside Gemini 3, you can use the same model set you’d use in Vertex AI and AI Studio, and Google’s own post positions it as a path to “higher, task‑oriented” workflows rather than just smarter autocomplete. (blog.google)
Where Antigravity shines
• Task telemetry and artifacts: The artifact model is a meaningful step toward change‑control discipline for agents. It helps leads review what happened—and why—without spelunking opaque tool logs. (theverge.com)
• Cross‑surface autonomy: Editor + terminal + browser access in one environment is practical when agents need to scaffold a web app, run a dev server, hit localhost, and validate a flow end‑to‑end. (theverge.com)
• Low‑friction trials: A no‑cost preview on all three major OSes makes it easy to spin up a lab. (blog.google)
Early cautions
• Governance maturity: You’ll need to design your own workflows for code ownership, approvals, and secrets isolation inside the IDE. The preview is promising, but most enterprises will still wrap it with policy, vaulting, and DLP. (blog.google)
• Model neutrality: While Antigravity emphasizes Gemini 3, teams that want first‑class multi‑agent neutrality (including non‑Google vendors) should compare how much switching cost or lock‑in shows up during real projects. Google says it’s designed to showcase what’s possible with Gemini 3; that’s the lens. (blog.google)
GitHub Agent HQ: an orchestration layer for any agent
Agent HQ sits one layer up from an IDE. Think of it as a control plane across the GitHub surfaces your team already lives in. It provides a single view to assign, steer, and track AI tasks, with identity and branch‑level controls for agent‑authored code. VS Code gets Plan Mode, so agents can propose step‑by‑step execution before touching code, and AGENTS.md lets you version control your team’s conventions. GitHub is also shipping an MCP registry in VS Code for one‑click tool integration. (github.blog)
Strategically, GitHub says it won’t compete on “who has the best agent.” It wants to be the neutral hub that coordinates them all. For engineering leaders with diverse stacks, that neutrality plus GitHub’s existing governance (repos, permissions, reviews, CI policies) can be a smoother cultural fit than introducing a new IDE. (implicator.ai)
Where Agent HQ shines
• Governance in your flow: Branch controls for agent code, identity mapping, and PR‑centric reviews meet enterprises where they already do change control. (github.blog)
• Multi‑agent by default: If you want Anthropic one day and a task‑specific model the next, the platform stance helps you avoid single‑vendor bet risk. (github.blog)
• Familiar surfaces: Web, mobile, CLI, and VS Code reduce training overhead. Plan Mode also helps senior engineers review proposals before execution. (github.blog)
Early cautions
• Rollout timing: Features arrive over “coming months” to paid Copilot plans. If you need agents next week, the staged availability may slow your pilot. (github.blog)
• IDE depth: Agent HQ is strongest as orchestration; if you want deep IDE‑level autonomy (terminal + browser in one sandbox), compare it with Antigravity’s all‑in‑one model. (github.blog)
Agentic development: how to choose your first pilot
Here’s the thing: both directions can work. Use this quick decision framework to select a starting point.
Decision drivers
• Stack gravity: If most work happens in GitHub PRs/Actions with VS Code, Agent HQ aligns with your habits. If your team invests heavily in Vertex AI/Google Cloud and wants one sandbox for agent autonomy, Antigravity is compelling. (github.blog)
• Model strategy: Want first‑class neutrality with multiple agent providers? Start with Agent HQ. Want to push Gemini 3’s newest agentic patterns? Start with Antigravity. (github.blog)
• Governance and audit: Strong existing GitHub enterprise controls tip the scale to Agent HQ. If you can accept preview‑era process work in exchange for deep autonomy, Antigravity is fine—just add your own policy wrappers. (github.blog)
• Security posture: Regardless of platform, treat agents like junior contractors with scoped permissions, dedicated branches, read‑only prod, and zero access to long‑lived secrets.
The 30–60–90 Agentic Pilot Plan
Days 0–30: Set the guardrails and run a “hello world” pilot
• Choose one platform to start. Create a separate organization (or sandbox account) with least‑privileged access. Use short‑lived credentials via your SSO and vault.
• Pick one bounded, reversible task: e.g., generate integration tests for a service; migrate a small Next.js route to App Router; or draft a Terraform module README. Keep impact low, feedback high. If Next.js is on your roadmap, our Next.js 16 upgrade playbook is a crisp candidate for agent‑assisted trial work.
• Establish review rituals: agents must open PRs with a plan, diffs, and evidence. Require approvals from codeowners and enforce PR templates with checklists.
• Instrument everything: baseline manual time, cycle time, review time, defect rate, and rework. The point of agentic development is measurable developer throughput, not novelty.
Days 31–60: Graduate to multi‑step, cross‑repo tasks
• Expand to tasks touching CI, codegen, and docs. Harden supply‑chain checks: signed commits, branch protections, dependency scanning, and policy‑as‑code (e.g., OPA) for PR gates.
• Add resilience drills: if an agent commits a bad config and your CDN goes sideways, how fast do you roll back? Borrow runbook structure from our resilience playbook for 2025 and rehearse.
• Cost hygiene: agents often run tools, browsers, and tests. Watch ephemeral compute and egress. If you’re experimenting with new container platforms, our notes on container pricing switches will help you avoid surprise bills.
Days 61–90: Production‑grade patterns
• Define “agent‑eligible” work: migrations, test authoring, seed projects, doc plumbing, perf experiments. Keep architecture, security controls, and critical data transforms human‑owned.
• Codify standards in‑repo: if you go the GitHub route, use AGENTS.md to set conventions (logger choice, test styles, error handling). If you go Antigravity, ship an internal playbook that mirrors those rules and PR templates. (github.blog)
• Shadow mode in prod: let agents propose changes against real services but merge only after human approval for one full release cycle.
People also ask
Is agentic development safe for production right now?
Yes—with the same disciplines you already apply to humans. That means identity‑scoped access, branch protections, required reviews, reproducible builds, SBOMs, and runtime guards. The difference is you must treat agents as untrusted contributors by default. Both Google and GitHub are building toward these controls; today you still own the policy glue. (github.blog)
Will agents replace developers?
No, they’ll change where developers spend time. The immediate wins are scaffolding, test coverage, rote migrations, and investigative chores (spikes, PoCs). Architecture choices, tradeoffs, and product feel remain human. Teams that lean in now will set the norms others copy later.
Which platform is cheaper?
In the short term, Antigravity’s free public preview reduces pilot cost; GitHub’s Agent HQ lands inside paid Copilot plans as it rolls out. Long term, your total cost depends on model usage (tokens), compute for tests, and the failure rate of agent PRs that require rework. Measure cost per merged PR, not just per‑token pricing. (blog.google)
A candid comparison, in one paragraph
If you want an all‑in‑one agent playground tied closely to Gemini 3 with autonomous execution inside a single IDE, Antigravity is the faster way to feel the future today. If you want multi‑agent neutrality and you live in GitHub with established enterprise controls, Agent HQ is the safer way to layer agents into the processes you already trust. Many teams will end up with both: Antigravity for exploratory build‑loops; Agent HQ for orchestrating agent work across repos with mature governance. (theverge.com)
Let’s get practical: a readiness checklist
Use this five‑point checklist before you let agents touch code:
1) Identity: SSO‑backed agent identities, no shared tokens, access scoped to non‑prod repos by default.
2) Secrets: No plaintext secrets in repos or agent prompts. Use a vault; rotate short‑lived credentials. Our CI token checklist applies here.
3) Change control: Required reviews from codeowners, signed commits, protected main, and PR templates that demand an agent’s plan and artifacts.
4) Observability: Capture agent prompts/responses tied to PRs for audit; store artifacts as build artifacts, not screenshots sprinkled in Slack.
5) Rollback: Always have a revert path and feature flags. Practice the failure path monthly.
What to do next
• Pick one pilot platform (Antigravity or Agent HQ) and one bounded repo. Timebox two weeks.
• Define success before you start: e.g., “Increase test coverage by 20 points with no new critical defects.”
• Assign a lead reviewer and a platform owner. Make them accountable for policy and metrics.
• Socialize results beyond engineering. Show real artifacts, merged PRs, and cycle‑time data to product and finance.
Want a second set of eyes on your pilot? We help teams design realistic trials, set guardrails, and turn wins into process. See our services or drop us a note via contact—and yes, we’ll bring a template repo and the PR checklist your reviewers will love.
