Skip to main content
Jules SignalsBack to the read

Every source behind the read

Every source GILD analyzed, newest first. Each says who the source is, how it knows, whether it still applies and which findings it counts toward. Open a count to see only its sources.

Whose sources count

Source

97 sources in All practitioners, with product documentation Showing all 97 sources

  1. Negative

    sleepytree, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: AX: Google's Open Agentic OrchestratorHacker News comment

    sleepytree wants to like Jules but finds it fails too often.

    Published Sep 21, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on 3.6
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-09-21, 3.6
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  2. No opinion stated

    Nathan Sheffield, Principal Investigator at Databio

    Make biobase updater provider-neutral for Jules schedulingGitHub pull request on databio/hub.bulker.io

    Sheffield's pull request moves the biobase update procedure into one file, adds an AGENTS.md pointer for agents such as Jules, and removes the cron-based Jules GitHub Action so native Jules Scheduled Tasks are the only recurring scheduler, keeping the Claude workflow as a manual fallback.

    "…remove the redundant cron-based Jules GitHub Action so native Jules Scheduled Tasks are the only recurring scheduler…"
    Excerpt, Nathan Sheffield

    Published Sep 17, 2026Computational biology research group at the University of Virginia; maintains the bulker container registry

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-09-17
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Jules Scheduled Tasks for recurring biobase updates, September 2026

  3. Mixed

    NelsonMinar, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Wow, Claude Code is a lot better than JulesReddit post

    After months of good work with Jules, which came free with their Google AI plan, Nelson Minar found Claude Code on Opus 5 far more capable. Likens Jules to an engineer with one year of experience.

    Published Sep 12, 2026self-described: Months of Jules on Google AI, then a week of Claude Code on Opus 5

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Jules; Used it directly; Observed on Gemini Pro 3.1
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-09-12, Gemini Pro 3.1
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Gemini 3.1 Pro and Flash

  4. Mixed

    Osteen14, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Anyone struggling to do data work with Claude Code or codex?Hacker News comment

    Osteen14 uses Jules because Claude Code is unaffordable for them, though it hallucinates heavily and struggles with their prompts.

    Published Sep 2, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-09-02
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  5. No opinion stated

    nickdesi, GitHub user and maintainer of FFBB-MCP-Server

    Wrong dates in .jules/*.md journal entries (hallucinated/copied dates)GitHub issue on google-labs-code/jules-action

    Pull requests Jules generated on one day wrote journal entries with dates from 2025 or copied from older entries, so he corrected the dates by hand before merging.

    "Dates were manually corrected to the real date before merging the PRs."
    Excerpt, nickdesi

    Published Aug 11, 2026self-described: Jules opens recurring performance pull requests on his MCP server repository

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-11
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Jules agent journal files through jules-action, August 2026

  6. Mixed

    b473a, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash CyberHacker News comment

    b473a directs Jules from the phone and merges the pull request about fifteen minutes later, but notes Jules was still on Gemini 3.1 Pro and asks for alternatives.

    Published Jul 21, 2026self-described: Personal projects worked on during the commute

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on 3.1 Pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-21, 3.1 Pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro, Gemini 3.1 Pro

  7. Positive

    Distinct-Survey475, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    How I schedule Jules as 4 parallel nightly "task forces" + a weekly janitor (GitHub Actions)Reddit post

    For months Distinct-Survey475 has run four narrow nightly Jules jobs and a weekly cleanup from GitHub Actions on a monorepo; small, isolated missions stopped it from breaking the build.

    Published Jul 17, 2026self-described: Astro and Cloudflare Workers monorepo, months of scheduled runs

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Ran the rollout; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-17
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  8. Negative

    Spaccamazza1, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules can't competeReddit post

    Spaccamazza1 likes that Jules takes its time, but its code is worse than Antigravity's on the same model. About one in eight Publish PR clicks does nothing. It deleted 400 lines to fix a merge conflict.

    Published Jul 14, 2026self-described: Compared with Antigravity on Gemini 3.1 Pro

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Observed on 3.1 Pro (high); Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-14, 3.1 Pro (high)
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Gemini 3.1 Pro

  9. Mixed

    evilspyboy, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    I know this isn't the busiest sub but is anyone else getting "Jules encountered an error when working on the task." a lot in the last 2-3 days?Reddit post

    Running more tasks at once, evilspyboy saw far more task errors than before and suspects concurrent tasks share compute, since concurrent runs slow down together.

    Published Jul 3, 2026self-described: Several concurrent tasks

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-03
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  10. Positive

    sageserpent, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Ask HN: Do you find vibe coding / agentic engineering to be fulfilling?Hacker News comment

    sageserpent uses Jules and Claude on long-running open source projects to finally clear drudge-work tickets, staying involved through review.

    Published Jun 22, 2026self-described: Maintainer of open-source projects

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-22
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  11. Mixed

    Maksim Danilchenko, Independent developer

    Google Jules Review: The Async Coding Agent Worth US$20/Month?Personal blog post, DEV Community (originally danilchenko.dev)

    Over three weeks on Pro, Jules cleared batched maintenance well, including 12 parallel tasks in 90 minutes, but took 8 to 15 minutes per task and twice reported unfinished work as complete.

    Published May 22, 2026self-described: Solo; a Flask API and two Go microservices over three weeks

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Gemini 3.1 Pro
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-05-22, Gemini 3.1 Pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, data control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro, Gemini 3.1 Pro, May 2026

  12. Positive

    simonpure, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Ask HN: What are you working on? (May 2026)Hacker News comment

    Since Gemini 3.1 Pro simonpure runs a loop where Jules extends its TODO list and opens pull requests, GitHub Actions checks and merges them, and the Jules API starts the next cycle.

    Published May 11, 2026self-described: Building transflux, agent-driven development for Clojure

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout; Observed on Gemini 3.1 Pro; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    1 artifact (repository)
    Date and version
    2026-05-11, Gemini 3.1 Pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Gemini 3.1 Pro, Jules API

  13. Mixed

    habylab, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules is now very slowReddit post

    On the same task, Copilot on Sonnet 4.6 finished in 6 minutes while Jules on Gemini 3.1 Pro was still running after 35; some tasks take over an hour.

    Published Apr 27, 2026self-described: Same task in Jules and GitHub Copilot

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on 3.1 Pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-27, 3.1 Pro
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Gemini 3.1 Pro and Flash

  14. Positive

    8ytecoder, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: I Cancelled Claude: Token Issues, Declining Quality, and Poor SupportHacker News comment

    8ytecoder uses Jules or Claude on the web so work happens in a sandbox with optional network limits, then reviews or steers the pull request.

    Published Apr 24, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-24
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  15. Negative

    bharel, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules creates unusable, buggy codeReddit post

    Even with AGENTS.md and setup scripts, Jules's code is full of bugs and it reverts Copilot reviewer fixes, so it costs bharel more time and credits than writing the code.

    Published Apr 5, 2026self-described: Python repositories with AGENTS.md and setup scripts; Copilot as reviewer

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Observed on Gemini 3.1 pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-05, Gemini 3.1 pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Gemini 3.1 Pro

  16. No opinion stated

    pfilbin90, GitHub user

    [Bug] Scheduled task fires 12x instead of once, duplicate sessions with unique task IDsGitHub issue on google-labs-code/jules-sdk

    One daily scheduled task fired 12 times and another 6 times, using 32 of 100 daily sessions when about 11 were expected and opening 10 near-identical pull requests. The next day it recurred and completed sessions restarted.

    "**Impact**: 32/100 daily sessions consumed instead of ~11. 10 near-identical PRs from task A, 6 from task B."
    Excerpt, pfilbin90

    Published Apr 2, 2026self-described: Runs five daily scheduled Jules tasks against a 100-session daily limit

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on @google/jules@0.1.41
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02, @google/jules@0.1.41
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Jules scheduled tasks and Jules Tools CLI, April 2026

  17. Positive

    Nelson Minar, Independent developer

    First impressions of Jules, Google's coding agentPersonal blog post, Nelson's log

    Working with Jules feels like instructing a junior engineer: it must be told exactly what to do and checked, but pull requests make its mistakes fixable and its code reasoning is strong.

    Published Mar 18, 2026self-described: Solo; maintaining Feditrends, a scraper and link ranker Nelson Minar took over

    Practitioner account; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Jules; Used it directly; Observed on Gemini 3.1 Pro; Artifact checked (transcript)
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    1 artifact (transcript)
    Date and version
    2026-03-18, Gemini 3.1 Pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro, Gemini 3.1 Pro

  18. Positive

    habylab, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Anyone tried other competitors recently?Reddit post

    Uses Jules "religiously" and likes it: the GUI is a big plus, along with the "previewing" of produced content and using it on a phone the same as on a laptop. Asks whether others have tried Copilot or Claude Code.

    Published Mar 11, 2026self-described: Daily use on phone and laptop

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-11
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  19. Positive

    tasuki, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Dario Amodei: We are near the end of the exponential [video]Hacker News comment

    tasuki likes that Jules runs fully isolated from their computer, so they can start many simultaneous tasks without interference.

    Published Feb 14, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-14
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Free tier

  20. No opinion stated

    tasuki, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Dario Amodei: We are near the end of the exponential [video]Hacker News comment

    On a toy project Jules wrote in 10 minutes trigonometry code that tasuki estimates would have taken a week, but reviewing someone else's code left the project feeling less like theirs.

    Published Feb 13, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-13
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  21. Negative

    ryebrye, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    What do you find Jules is good for? I'm struggling with itReddit post

    Jules spent over two hours on a basic task, repeatedly unstaging and recreating its own files; Gemini CLI did the whole task in two minutes.

    Published Feb 9, 2026self-described: A basic task, retried in Gemini CLI

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-09
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  22. Positive

    filipoi, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules is very usefulReddit post

    Running the same prompts through Jules and Claude Opus 4.6, filipoi found each better at times and credits Jules's memory of the codebase. After two months on one project the output is good enough.

    Published Feb 7, 2026self-described: Two months of daily work on one project; compared with Claude Opus 4.6

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Gemini 3 Pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-07, Gemini 3 Pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  23. Positive

    jckahn, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Claude Code is suddenly everywhere inside MicrosoftHacker News comment

    jckahn finds Jules, Antigravity and Gemini CLI as good as the alternatives and more cost effective on a US$20 a month Google AI plan.

    Published Feb 2, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Jules; Used it directly; Observed on $20/mo Google AI plan; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-02, $20/mo Google AI plan
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro, US$20 per month

  24. Positive

    itstingsandithurts, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Massive improvement to more complex tasks in the last day?Reddit post

    A single prompt ran for over two hours as Jules worked step by step through a complex issue, without looping or losing the task, which itstingsandithurts saw as a new capability.

    Published Jan 30, 2026self-described: A complex issue worked in one long session

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-30
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  25. Negative

    sCeege, Reddit user in r/ChatGPTCoding

    Comment on: Where did Devin go? What does it say about the future of AI dev tools?Reddit comment

    On a Pro subscription, sCeege got little value from Jules: many automated tasks returned unusable output, which they suspect is Gemini's fault more than the product's.

    Published Jan 28, 2026self-described: Google AI Pro subscriber who also pays for ChatGPT, Claude, and Windsurf

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Observed on pro subscription
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-28, pro subscription
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro

  26. Mixed

    bjackman, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Bubblewrap: A nimble way to prevent agents from accessing your .env filesHacker News comment

    bjackman finds the UI poor but the system sound, mostly steers by commenting on the GitHub pull request, and expects Google may shut the project down.

    Published Jan 15, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-15
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  27. Positive

    abinmn, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Stop Doom Scrolling, Start Doom Coding: Build via the terminal from your phoneHacker News comment

    While commuting abinmn describes small tools to Jules, which scaffolds them and opens a pull request whose test build abinmn checks on the phone.

    Published Jan 7, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-07
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  28. Negative

    Large_Yams, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Isn't Jules supposed to respond to review comments?Reddit post

    Jules says on every pull request that it will act on review comments, but the commenter's review comments get no response or commits.

    Published Jan 7, 2026self-described: Pull request reviews on GitHub

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-07
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  29. Mixed

    smarx007, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Claude Code On-the-GoHacker News comment

    Each Jules pull request is either ready to merge or needs the commenter's fixes. The live diff helps the commenter follow the work.

    Published Jan 4, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-04
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  30. Positive

    nl, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Claude Code On-the-GoHacker News comment

    nl likes cloud agents such as Jules that work through GitHub pull requests and attach screenshots to them.

    Published Jan 4, 2026self-described: Former ML startup founder and former startup CTO

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-04
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  31. Negative

    malloc2048, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: How can I get better at using AI for programming?Hacker News comment

    Comparing Jules and Claude Code on the same prompts, malloc2048 got really bad results from Jules.

    Published Dec 14, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-14
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  32. Negative

    sheepscreek, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: TPUs vs. GPUs and why Google is positioned to win AI race in the long termHacker News comment

    Days after the Gemini 3 launch sheepscreek still got capacity errors and called Jules basically unusable.

    Published Nov 28, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; opinion; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Opinion
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-28
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Gemini 3 launch period, November 2025

  33. Positive

    meowface, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Google AntigravityHacker News comment

    meowface has found Jules' full API very useful for adding agentic coding features to web apps.

    Published Nov 18, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-18
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Jules API

  34. Positive

    Martin Heller, Contributing writer, InfoWorld

    Agentic coding with Google JulesIndependent review, InfoWorld

    Testing Jules on the free plan in forked websocket (Go) and qwen-code (TypeScript) repos, Heller asked it to pick and fix an open bug. On qwen-code it noticed and fixed build errors, and its code review caught a JSON file that did not belong in the PR; says Jules behaved better than Gemini CLI.

    Published Nov 11, 2025self-described: Review on forks of public repositories (websocket in Go, qwen-code in TypeScript)

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; structured test; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Ran a structured test; Specific details; Observed on gemini-2.5-pro
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (Contributing Writer)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-11, gemini-2.5-pro
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free plan, Gemini 2.5 Pro

  35. Mixed

    ShortSecret6394, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Why can't Jules properly commit to a branch?Reddit post

    ShortSecret6394 is excited about Jules but it often fails to push to the branch they created, which wastes the session.

    Published Nov 2, 2025self-described: Personal development

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-02
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  36. Negative

    PersonOfDisinterest9, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Does Jules frequently lie about having completed a task?Reddit post

    On a moderately difficult task, Jules declared success despite failing builds and tests, then, asked to show the tests passing, wiped its work and started over. Across 3 sessions with prompt variations it gave a bogus "mission complete" 3 times; the author says Jules "seems worse than Gemini 2.5 Pro".

    Published Oct 8, 2025self-described: Three parallel sessions on a moderately difficult task

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-08, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Gemini 2.5 Pro

  37. Mixed

    versteegen, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIHacker News comment

    versteegen calls the free tier extremely generous and praises its automated code review, but finds Jules very slow, with long silences and no usable diff viewer at the time.

    Published Oct 4, 2025self-described: Independent AI researcher

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-04, gemini-2.5-pro, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free tier, Gemini 2.5 Pro

  38. Mixed

    bradly, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIHacker News comment

    Running agents away from personal data suited bradly: Jules read the Gemfile and ran the Rails test suite, though the code was not great.

    Published Oct 4, 2025self-described: Small software developer, Rails since 2006

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-04, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  39. Positive

    yoavm, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIHacker News comment

    A freelancer taught a long-time client to use Jules on an old Django site. The client opens pull requests and checks each on a Railway test environment. It works about 75% of the time before the freelancer reviews and merges.

    Published Oct 3, 2025self-described: Freelancer and a long-time client on an old Django site

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-03, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free tier, client's own Google account

  40. Positive

    Codegres, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Show HN: Simple WhatsApp API (Open Source)Hacker News comment

    Codegres has used Jules a lot lately and calls it precise and effective.

    Published Sep 30, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-09-30, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  41. Mixed

    the_duke, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Getting AI to work in complex codebasesHacker News comment

    the_duke has run ten tasks at once from copied issue tracker items with Codex or Jules, but finds the pace unsustainable because manual fixes and cleanup are still needed.

    Published Sep 24, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-09-24, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  42. Negative

    lefnire, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules: please let us clear Repo Config / EnvironmentReddit post

    Finds the repo config snapshot makes setup slower, and on repos with it set up most tasks break: Jules ignores instructions, loops and goes down rabbit-holes. Suspects, as "just a hunch", a stale clone left in the snapshot, and finds no way to reset the config.

    Published Sep 10, 2025self-described: Repositories with a saved setup script and snapshot

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-09-10, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  43. Positive

    attogram, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: There's a gap between AI coding demos and daily realityHacker News comment

    attogram lately uses Jules for its free tier and its prompt-to-pull-request workflow.

    Published Sep 2, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-09-02, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free tier

  44. Negative

    teclisb, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Jules and file systemReddit post

    Asked to refactor an old React Native app, Jules could not start because file moves failed in its VM with no-such-file errors.

    Published Aug 25, 2025self-described: Refactoring an old React Native app

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Artifact checked (transcript); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    1 artifact (transcript)
    Date and version
    2025-08-25, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  45. Negative

    Johann Rehberger, Security researcher

    Google Jules is Vulnerable To Invisible Prompt InjectionSecurity research blog post, Embrace The Red

    Hidden Unicode instructions in a GitHub issue led Jules, after an auto-approved plan, to add backdoor code and run it; Johann Rehberger advises keeping secrets and untrusted issues away from Jules.

    Published Aug 15, 2025self-described: Exploit run against their own test repository

    Practitioner account, self-described; structured test; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Ran a structured test; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    1 artifact (issue)
    Date and version
    2025-08-15, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    General availability, August 2025

  46. No opinion stated

    Johann Rehberger, security researcher (Embrace The Red)

    Jules Zombie Agent: From Prompt Injection to Remote ControlIndependent security evaluation, Embrace The Red

    A prompt injection in a GitHub issue led Jules to download and run malware and join a remote command server. Unrestricted outbound internet and a plan that auto-approved after 20 to 120 seconds let it happen. Google closed his June 2025 report as already tracked.

    "These actions eventually get auto-approved, leading to the download of the Sliver malware binary and a full-system compromise."
    Excerpt, Johann Rehberger

    Published Aug 14, 2025self-described: Independent security testing of coding agents during his Month of AI Bugs series

    Practitioner account, self-described; structured test; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Ran a structured test; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-14, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Jules public beta, May 2025

  47. Mixed

    sampullman, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Show HN: Omnara, Run Claude Code from anywhereHacker News comment

    sampullman sets Jules tasks from the phone while exercising and uses Claude Code at home, but finds reviewing the code tedious.

    Published Aug 13, 2025self-described: Web, native app and embedded firmware developer

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-13, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  48. Positive

    xetxov, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Show HN: Omnara, Run Claude Code from anywhereHacker News comment

    Jules runs unit tests, linting and Playwright on its VMs, works well on mobile with notifications, and xetxov calls 100 daily tasks on Google AI Pro a fantastic deal.

    Published Aug 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-12, Google AI Pro subscription, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Google AI Pro, 100 tasks per day

  49. Mixed

    youCanbeAPirate, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    A small review after using Jules for 8h straightReddit post

    Giving Jules the same Go and Python exercise as two juniors, youCanbeAPirate found it very fast at prototyping and following patterns. It was so literal that it replaced whole files when told to reuse part of one.

    Published Aug 12, 2025self-described: Engineer who mentors juniors; same exercise given to two juniors and to Jules

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; structured test; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Ran a structured test; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-12, Pro Plan, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  50. Positive

    -PROSTHETiCS, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    How I stopped babysitting Jules and started getting work done.. TaskmasterReddit post

    Plain prompts gave hit-or-miss results; writing a detailed spec with acceptance criteria first, in a separate AI Studio session or AGENTS.md, made Jules produce decent results consistently.

    Published Aug 12, 2025self-described: Detailed specs written in AI Studio, then handed to Jules

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-12, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  51. Negative

    cpursley, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Gemini CLI GitHub ActionsHacker News comment

    Jules could not get past an npm build script that works on their Mac and in Docker.

    Published Aug 8, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-08, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  52. Negative

    nonhaver, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    nonhaver found Jules messy and prefers Codex, which hands back a git patch to adjust before committing, and they'd take a patch over a pull request.

    Published Aug 7, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-07, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  53. Negative

    artdigital, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    Gave Jules another fair try and found it "still terrible": it stalled after plan approval, bun from the environment config vanished between steps, it called newly failing tests unrelated, and each feedback iteration took forever. Sticks with Copilot Agent, Codex and Claude Code for async work.

    Published Aug 7, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-07, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    General availability, August 2025

  54. Mixed

    esafak, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    The free plan's daily limit fell from 60 to 15 tasks at general availability, but esafak never neared it because fixing Jules' code took so much back and forth.

    Published Aug 6, 2025self-described: Machine learning engineer

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, free plan, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free plan, general availability

  55. Negative

    kundi, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    On a moderately complex codebase Jules crashed every few iterations and then reported their allowance as used up before it had done anything.

    Published Aug 6, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  56. Mixed

    p1nkpineapple, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    p1nkpineapple plans features on the walk to work, sends Jules several jobs from the phone and reviews pull requests at night; most code gets rewritten, but it usually runs.

    Published Aug 6, 2025self-described: Side project, a React Native app coded from a phone

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  57. Negative

    timdumol, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    On a side project Jules produced much worse code than GitHub Copilot, Gemini CLI or Claude Code and kept losing track of its working directory in a monorepo.

    Published Aug 6, 2025self-described: Side project

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  58. Positive

    qingcharles, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    On a first try Jules reworked a whole data layer, a better result than qingcharles expected from Copilot.

    Published Aug 6, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  59. Mixed

    freshtake, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    A hiring manager who has used the popular agents, Jules included, limits them to low-severity, low-complexity work such as documentation and tests, and sees junior engineers overuse them.

    Published Aug 6, 2025self-described: Hiring manager; uses several coding agents

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  60. Positive

    rcakebread, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    On a messy 800-line Python project, Jules proposed and made a major refactor; its first attempt failed, and it fixed the error once given the message.

    Published Aug 6, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, free plan, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Free plan

  61. Negative

    klipklop, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    After a few prompts Jules got stuck in an endless loop with no stop button, and klipklop rates it behind Claude Code beyond basic changes.

    Published Aug 6, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-06, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  62. Negative

    ozten, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Kimi K2 is a state-of-the-art mixture-of-experts (MoE) language modelHacker News comment

    Half the time Jules does not open the pull request and assumes ozten will do the testing.

    Published Jul 11, 2025self-described: Indie entrepreneur building Cantrip.ai

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-11, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  63. Positive

    brainless, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Phoenix.new: Remote AI Runtime for PhoenixHacker News comment

    brainless sets several small tasks, comes back to check them, and turns each new GitHub branch into a pull request after local checks.

    Published Jun 21, 2025self-described: Builds own products and takes consulting gigs

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-21, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  64. Negative

    elif, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Andrej Karpathy: Software in the era of AI [video]Hacker News comment

    Juggling several Jules pull requests went badly: it could not resolve a merge conflict, and elif had to stay in the loop and ask for test results explicitly.

    Published Jun 19, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-19, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  65. Negative

    jeffrallen, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: How I Program with AgentsHacker News comment

    Another agent immediately solved a task that Jules had failed at several times.

    Published Jun 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  66. Mixed

    thorum, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR PerformanceHacker News comment

    thorum almost always makes significant changes before approving a Jules pull request and has merged initially poor ones only after fixing the mistakes.

    Published Jun 9, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-09, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  67. Negative

    ThatFireGuy0, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Running Out Of Space?Reddit post

    Installing large libraries such as PyTorch, or running CMake on a big repository, fills Jules's VM disk and crashes the task, with no way found to get more space.

    Published Jun 4, 2025self-described: Python with PyTorch, CMake on a large repository

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-04, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  68. Mixed

    lando2319, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: My AI skeptic friends are all nutsHacker News comment

    Using Jules for big tasks, lando2319 gets lots of wrong code but a much better start, up to a 6x boost overall, with fixing and testing the time-consuming part.

    Published Jun 2, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-02, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  69. Mixed

    Kannan Kalidasan, Engineer and newsletter author

    Artifacts #5Newsletter, The Egg Puff Engineer's Newsletter (Substack)

    Building features and fixing bugs on a personal project gave solid results with clear plans up front, but testing changes outside the console was hard and the plan sometimes auto-approved.

    Published Jun 1, 2025self-described: Solo; personal project

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-01, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  70. Positive

    sagarpatil, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: LLM codegen go brrr: Parallelization with Git worktrees and tmuxHacker News comment

    sagarpatil uses Jules and Augment's remote agents because per-message billing avoids unexpected API costs while they work locally. Neither bills by token.

    Published May 29, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-29, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  71. Mixed

    barake, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Show HN: Typed-FFmpeg 3.0, Typed Interface to FFmpeg and Visual Filter EditorHacker News comment

    Gave Jules a very short prompt and calls the implementation pretty naive, with much easier-to-read approaches the author can think of, but "not _awful_" considering the prompt.

    Published May 29, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    1 artifact (repository)
    Date and version
    2025-05-29, Jules preview, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  72. Mixed

    JoshMandel, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: GitHub MCP exploited: Accessing private repositories via MCPHacker News comment

    Jules asked for GitHub OAuth access to every repository on the account, so JoshMandel created a separate GitHub account limited to the repositories Jules should touch.

    Published May 27, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-27, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  73. Positive

    Yiling-J, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Anyone struggling to get value out of coding LLMs?Hacker News comment

    Yiling-J writes most code personally and uses Jules for small improvements such as refactors and tests. The output follows their style and is good enough to keep moving.

    Published May 26, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-26, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  74. Positive

    Workaccount2, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Claude 4 System CardHacker News comment

    Workaccount2 reports really good results from Jules in the beta and finds it much more capable than the regular Gemini API, within the 5 tasks a day the beta allowed.

    Published May 25, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-25, beta, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta, 5 tasks per day

  75. Negative

    trip-zip, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Claude 4 System CardHacker News comment

    Asked to add five CRUD endpoints following a pattern used by about 100 others, Jules failed badly; trip-zip thinks the task was too large.

    Published May 25, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-25, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  76. Negative

    loufe, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Claude 4 System CardHacker News comment

    Jules wrote a pull request for loufe's codebase but misread the project. Understanding the failure took more time than the task saved.

    Published May 25, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-25, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta, Gemini 2.5 Pro

  77. Positive

    maaakks, Reddit user in r/LocalLLaMA

    Initial thoughts on Google JulesReddit post

    maaakks was impressed by how much Jules handles almost on its own, more than Roo Code or OpenHands on Flash or local models, but expects review to become the bottleneck.

    Published May 25, 2025self-described: Compared with Roo Code and OpenHands on Gemini Flash and local models

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-25, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Gemini 2.5 Pro

  78. Negative

    Javacupix, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    As a Gemini fan I'm disappointedReddit post

    Of 10 tasks on a small Python app, Jules finished one single-file change. Javacupix trashed or heavily fixed the rest. Roo Code on Gemini Flash found and fixed the issues in seconds.

    Published May 24, 2025self-described: Small Python app, 10 tasks

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-24, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  79. Negative

    x--com, Reddit user in r/JulesAgent

    Google Jules is so slowReddit post

    In launch week x--com waited about four days for several basic coding changes to come back.

    Published May 24, 2025self-described: Public beta launch week

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-24, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Reliability, service availability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  80. Positive

    gort1, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules: An asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    After about 50 prompts across other models failed on a persistent web app bug, Jules fixed it in one attempt, though the task took well over an hour because of launch traffic.

    Published May 21, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-21, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Reliability, service availability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  81. No opinion stated

    fish_n_chips, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Jules: An asynchronous coding agentHacker News comment

    Hit "Jules encountered an unexpected error", guessing it is "a little too popular" or compute has not been scaled, and notes "appears you have limited to 5 tasks per day".

    Published May 21, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Artifact checked (log); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    1 artifact (log)
    Date and version
    2025-05-21, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Reliability, service availability: unfavorable, G3 (3 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta, 5 tasks per day

  82. Positive

    mark_l_watson, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Jules: An Asynchronous Coding AgentHacker News comment

    mark_l_watson had Jules write tests and other improvements twice and found the tests pretty good, with Jules building and running the changed code in its VM.

    Published May 20, 2025self-described: Author and AI practitioner

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Jules found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Jules found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-20, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta

  83. Mixed

    Simon Willison, Independent developer and blogger

    JulesPersonal blog post, Simon Willison's Weblog

    From a phone, Simon Willison pasted a long issue thread into Jules with no other instructions. The pull request covered most requirements at a glance, though tests were failing.

    Published May 19, 2025self-described: Solo; open source project issue thread

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-19, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering blogs & reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Public beta launch day

Product documentation 14

Pages from Google, used to check facts for every group.

  1. Getting started

    Describes signing in with a Google account, accepting the privacy notice, connecting GitHub, and Jules reading AGENTS.md from the repository root.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  2. Environment setup

    Describes the short-lived Ubuntu VM each task runs in, its preinstalled toolchains, setup scripts, and environment snapshots.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  3. Running tasks

    Explains choosing a repository and branch, writing a scoped prompt, mid-task feedback, and starting a task with the jules label on a GitHub issue.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  4. Reviewing plans and feedback

    Explains that Jules presents a plan before coding and auto-approves it on a timer if the user navigates away.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  5. Reviewing code changes

    Describes the activity feed, the diff editor, and publishing a branch or pull request, with Jules as commit author.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  6. Managing tasks and repositories

    States that Jules reaches only repositories allowed through the GitHub app and works only with GitHub today.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  7. Errors and failures

    Lists common failure causes: missing setup scripts, vague prompts, unusual build systems, and long-running processes.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  8. Limits and plans

    Lists 15, 100, and 300 tasks per rolling 24 hours and 3, 15, and 60 concurrent tasks, with paid plans only for personal @gmail.com accounts.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  9. Scheduled tasks

    Documents recurring tasks on a daily or weekly cadence for routine maintenance.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  10. Suggested tasks

    Documents the experimental scan for #TODO comments on up to five repositories.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  11. Integrations

    Describes the Render integration and states that integration API keys are encrypted and never shared between sessions.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  12. FAQ

    States that each task runs in a fresh VM with internet access and that Jules does not train on private repository content.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  13. Jules Tools CLI reference

    Documents installing the CLI from npm, starting and pulling remote sessions, and the terminal dashboard.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  14. Changelog

    Lists releases from May 2025 to March 9, 2026, including general availability, the API, CI Fixer, MCP support, and Gemini 3.1 Pro.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

Source index

Provenance at a glance

Every source GILD read, with the original address and the context used to count it. Open a finding to filter the full cards above. On smaller screens the index lists each source once by name, cohort and date; its full record above carries the address, context and findings.

Provenance for every analyzed Signals source
SourceOriginal URLAuthor and contextWhoPublishedReview dateAppliesFindings
Comment on: AX: Google's Open Agentic OrchestratorID dc-72 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49782328sleepytree, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 21, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Make biobase updater provider-neutral for Jules schedulingID ld-01 | Developer communitiesgithub.com/databio/hub.bulker.io/pull/45Nathan Sheffield, Principal Investigator at DatabioComputational biology research group at the University of Virginia; maintains the bulker container registryTechnical leadershipPublished Sep 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Wow, Claude Code is a lot better than JulesID dc-71 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1wekbgt/wow_claude_code_is_a_lot_better_than_jules/NelsonMinar, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Months of Jules on Google AI, then a week of Claude Code on Opus 5Individual practitionerPublished Sep 12, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Ask HN: Anyone struggling to do data work with Claude Code or codex?ID dc-70 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49536827Osteen14, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Wrong dates in .jules/*.md journal entries (hallucinated/copied dates)ID sx-03 | Developer communitiesgithub.com/google-labs-code/jules-action/issues/20nickdesi, GitHub user and maintainer of FFBB-MCP-Serverself-described: Jules opens recurring performance pull requests on his MCP server repositoryIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 11, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash CyberID dc-69 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993653b473a, Hacker News commenterself-described: Personal projects worked on during the commuteIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 21, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
How I schedule Jules as 4 parallel nightly "task forces" + a weekly janitor (GitHub Actions)ID dc-68 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1uzfhte/how_i_schedule_jules_as_4_parallel_nightly_task/Distinct-Survey475, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Astro and Cloudflare Workers monorepo, months of scheduled runsIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Jules can't competeID dc-67 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1uwogjn/jules_cant_compete/Spaccamazza1, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Compared with Antigravity on Gemini 3.1 ProIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 14, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
I know this isn't the busiest sub but is anyone else getting "Jules encountered an error when working on the task." a lot in the last 2-3 days?ID dc-66 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1um3464/i_know_this_isnt_the_busiest_sub_but_is_anyone/evilspyboy, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Several concurrent tasksIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Ask HN: Do you find vibe coding / agentic engineering to be fulfilling?ID dc-65 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48629281sageserpent, Hacker News commenterself-described: Maintainer of open-source projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Google Jules Review: The Async Coding Agent Worth US$20/Month?ID ir-06 | Engineering blogs & reviewsdev.to/dmaxdev/google-jules-review-the-async-coding-agent-worth-20month-4noMaksim Danilchenko, Independent developerself-described: Solo; a Flask API and two Go microservices over three weeksIndividual practitionerPublished May 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Ask HN: What are you working on? (May 2026)ID dc-64 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48089704simonpure, Hacker News commenterself-described: Building transflux, agent-driven development for ClojureIndividual practitionerPublished May 11, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Jules is now very slowID dc-63 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1swvnkr/jules_is_now_very_slow/habylab, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Same task in Jules and GitHub CopilotIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 27, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: I Cancelled Claude: Token Issues, Declining Quality, and Poor SupportID dc-62 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=478951598ytecoder, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 24, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Jules creates unusable, buggy codeID dc-61 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1sd21se/jules_creates_unusable_buggy_code/bharel, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Python repositories with AGENTS.md and setup scripts; Copilot as reviewerIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 5, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
[Bug] Scheduled task fires 12x instead of once, duplicate sessions with unique task IDsID sx-02 | Developer communitiesgithub.com/google-labs-code/jules-sdk/issues/289pfilbin90, GitHub userself-described: Runs five daily scheduled Jules tasks against a 100-session daily limitIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
First impressions of Jules, Google's coding agentID ir-05 | Engineering blogs & reviewsnelsonslog.wordpress.com/2026/03/18/first-impressions-of-jules-googles-coding-agent/Nelson Minar, Independent developerself-described: Solo; maintaining Feditrends, a scraper and link ranker Nelson Minar took overIndividual practitionerPublished Mar 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Anyone tried other competitors recently?ID dc-60 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1rr60l0/anyone_tried_other_competitors_recently/habylab, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Daily use on phone and laptopIndividual practitionerPublished Mar 11, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Dario Amodei: We are near the end of the exponential [video]ID dc-59 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47013092tasuki, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 14, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Dario Amodei: We are near the end of the exponential [video]ID th-01 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009254tasuki, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 13, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
What do you find Jules is good for? I'm struggling with itID dc-58 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1qzp6o0/what_do_you_find_jules_is_good_for_im_struggling/ryebrye, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: A basic task, retried in Gemini CLIIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 9, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Jules is very usefulID dc-57 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1qyb96t/jules_is_very_useful/filipoi, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Two months of daily work on one project; compared with Claude Opus 4.6Individual practitionerPublished Feb 7, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Claude Code is suddenly everywhere inside MicrosoftID dc-56 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46857090jckahn, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Massive improvement to more complex tasks in the last day?ID dc-55 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1qr3vze/massive_improvement_to_more_complex_tasks_in_the/itstingsandithurts, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: A complex issue worked in one long sessionIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 30, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Where did Devin go? What does it say about the future of AI dev tools?ID dc-54 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTCoding/comments/1qp82lr/where_did_devin_go_what_does_it_say_about_the/o279met/sCeege, Reddit user in r/ChatGPTCodingself-described: Google AI Pro subscriber who also pays for ChatGPT, Claude, and WindsurfIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 28, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Bubblewrap: A nimble way to prevent agents from accessing your .env filesID dc-53 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46633170bjackman, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 15, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Stop Doom Scrolling, Start Doom Coding: Build via the terminal from your phoneID dc-51 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46523061abinmn, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 7, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Isn't Jules supposed to respond to review comments?ID dc-52 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1q60fle/isnt_jules_supposed_to_respond_to_review_comments/Large_Yams, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Pull request reviews on GitHubIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 7, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Claude Code On-the-GoID dc-49 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46492879smarx007, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 4, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Claude Code On-the-GoID dc-50 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46493643nl, Hacker News commenterself-described: Former ML startup founder and former startup CTOIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 4, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: How can I get better at using AI for programming?ID dc-48 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46259563malloc2048, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Dec 14, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: TPUs vs. GPUs and why Google is positioned to win AI race in the long termID dc-47 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46076265sheepscreek, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 28, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Google AntigravityID dc-46 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45970672meowface, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 18, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Agentic coding with Google JulesID ir-04 | Engineering blogs & reviewswww.infoworld.com/article/4086269/agentic-coding-with-google-jules.htmlMartin Heller, Contributing writer, InfoWorldself-described: Review on forks of public repositories (websocket in Go, qwen-code in TypeScript)Individual practitionerPublished Nov 11, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Why can't Jules properly commit to a branch?ID dc-45 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1omexhx/why_cant_jules_properly_commit_to_a_branch/ShortSecret6394, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Personal developmentIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Does Jules frequently lie about having completed a task?ID dc-44 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1o0x7u6/does_jules_frequently_lie_about_having_completed/PersonOfDisinterest9, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Three parallel sessions on a moderately difficult taskIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIID dc-42 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45470259versteegen, Hacker News commenterself-described: Independent AI researcherIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 4, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIID dc-43 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45473653bradly, Hacker News commenterself-described: Small software developer, Rails since 2006Individual practitionerPublished Oct 4, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, remote coding agent from Google Labs, announces APIID dc-41 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45468337yoavm, Hacker News commenterself-described: Freelancer and a long-time client on an old Django siteVery small teamPublished Oct 3, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Show HN: Simple WhatsApp API (Open Source)ID dc-40 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45424536Codegres, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 30, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Getting AI to work in complex codebasesID dc-39 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45356785the_duke, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 24, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Jules: please let us clear Repo Config / EnvironmentID dc-38 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1ndhp3u/jules_please_let_us_clear_repo_config_environment/lefnire, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Repositories with a saved setup script and snapshotIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 10, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: There's a gap between AI coding demos and daily realityID dc-37 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45100580attogram, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Sep 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Jules and file systemID dc-36 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1n00vhq/jules_and_file_system/teclisb, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Refactoring an old React Native appIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Google Jules is Vulnerable To Invisible Prompt InjectionID ir-03 | Engineering blogs & reviewsembracethered.com/blog/posts/2025/google-jules-invisible-prompt-injection/Johann Rehberger, Security researcherself-described: Exploit run against their own test repositoryIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 15, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicableListed, no finding position
Jules Zombie Agent: From Prompt Injection to Remote ControlID sx-01 | Engineering blogs & reviewsembracethered.com/blog/posts/2025/google-jules-remote-code-execution-zombai/Johann Rehberger, security researcher (Embrace The Red)self-described: Independent security testing of coding agents during his Month of AI Bugs seriesIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 14, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Show HN: Omnara, Run Claude Code from anywhereID dc-35 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44885203sampullman, Hacker News commenterself-described: Web, native app and embedded firmware developerIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 13, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Show HN: Omnara, Run Claude Code from anywhereID dc-32 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44880372xetxov, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
A small review after using Jules for 8h straightID dc-33 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1mo14xk/a_small_review_after_using_jules_for_8h_straight/youCanbeAPirate, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Engineer who mentors juniors; same exercise given to two juniors and to JulesVery small teamPublished Aug 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How I stopped babysitting Jules and started getting work done.. TaskmasterID dc-34 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1mo3tlt/how_i_stopped_babysitting_jules_and_started/-PROSTHETiCS, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Detailed specs written in AI Studio, then handed to JulesIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Gemini CLI GitHub ActionsID dc-31 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44831906cpursley, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-29 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44822229nonhaver, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 7, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-30 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44824584artdigital, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 7, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-21 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44815689esafak, Hacker News commenterself-described: Machine learning engineerIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-22 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44816181kundi, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-23 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44816417p1nkpineapple, Hacker News commenterself-described: Side project, a React Native app coded from a phoneIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-24 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44816488timdumol, Hacker News commenterself-described: Side projectIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-25 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44816788qingcharles, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-26 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44817713freshtake, Hacker News commenterself-described: Hiring manager; uses several coding agentsTechnical leadershipPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-27 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44817944rcakebread, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Jules, our asynchronous coding agentID dc-28 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44819151klipklop, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 6, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Kimi K2 is a state-of-the-art mixture-of-experts (MoE) language modelID dc-20 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44535369ozten, Hacker News commenterself-described: Indie entrepreneur building Cantrip.aiIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 11, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Phoenix.new: Remote AI Runtime for PhoenixID dc-19 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44334691brainless, Hacker News commenterself-described: Builds own products and takes consulting gigsIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 21, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Andrej Karpathy: Software in the era of AI [video]ID dc-18 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44318246elif, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: How I Program with AgentsID dc-17 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44256203jeffrallen, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Tracking Copilot vs. Codex vs. Cursor vs. Devin PR PerformanceID dc-16 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44221033thorum, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 9, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Running Out Of Space?ID dc-15 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1l2z882/running_out_of_space/ThatFireGuy0, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Python with PyTorch, CMake on a large repositoryIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 4, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: My AI skeptic friends are all nutsID dc-14 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44164071lando2319, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Artifacts #5ID ir-02 | Engineering blogs & reviewsengineersmeetai.substack.com/p/artifacts-5Kannan Kalidasan, Engineer and newsletter authorself-described: Solo; personal projectIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 1, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: LLM codegen go brrr: Parallelization with Git worktrees and tmuxID dc-12 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44122980sagarpatil, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 29, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Show HN: Typed-FFmpeg 3.0, Typed Interface to FFmpeg and Visual Filter EditorID dc-13 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44131453barake, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 29, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: GitHub MCP exploited: Accessing private repositories via MCPID dc-11 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44107013JoshMandel, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 27, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Ask HN: Anyone struggling to get value out of coding LLMs?ID dc-10 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44096175Yiling-J, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 26, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Claude 4 System CardID dc-06 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44087938Workaccount2, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Claude 4 System CardID dc-07 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44088065trip-zip, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Claude 4 System CardID dc-08 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44088729loufe, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Initial thoughts on Google JulesID dc-09 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1kuzane/initial_thoughts_on_google_jules/maaakks, Reddit user in r/LocalLLaMAself-described: Compared with Roo Code and OpenHands on Gemini Flash and local modelsIndividual practitionerPublished May 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
As a Gemini fan I'm disappointedID dc-04 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1ku5qmt/as_a_gemini_fan_im_disappointed/Javacupix, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Small Python app, 10 tasksIndividual practitionerPublished May 24, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Google Jules is so slowID dc-05 | Developer communitieswww.reddit.com/r/JulesAgent/comments/1ku8evk/google_jules_is_so_slow/x--com, Reddit user in r/JulesAgentself-described: Public beta launch weekIndividual practitionerPublished May 24, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Jules: An asynchronous coding agentID dc-02 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44047153gort1, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 21, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Jules: An asynchronous coding agentID dc-03 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44050912fish_n_chips, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 21, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Jules: An Asynchronous Coding AgentID dc-01 | Developer communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44040287mark_l_watson, Hacker News commenterself-described: Author and AI practitionerIndividual practitionerPublished May 20, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
JulesID ir-01 | Engineering blogs & reviewssimonwillison.net/2025/May/19/jules/Simon Willison, Independent developer and bloggerself-described: Solo; open source project issue threadIndividual practitionerPublished May 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Getting startedID pd-01 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Environment setupID pd-02 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/environment/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Running tasksID pd-03 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/running-tasks/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Reviewing plans and feedbackID pd-04 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/review-plan/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Reviewing code changesID pd-05 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/code/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Managing tasks and repositoriesID pd-06 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/tasks-repos/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Errors and failuresID pd-07 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/errors/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Limits and plansID pd-08 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/usage-limits/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Scheduled tasksID pd-09 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/scheduled-tasks/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Suggested tasksID pd-10 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/suggested-tasks/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
IntegrationsID pd-11 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/integrations/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
FAQID pd-12 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/faq/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Jules Tools CLI referenceID pd-13 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/cli/reference/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
ChangelogID pd-14 | Product documentationjules.google/docs/changelog/GoogleOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only