Sunday, May 24, 2026

Claude Co-Work vs. In-House Tools

Just a month or two ago, the tech world boasted about how many tokens it burned (i.e. how large its operating expense was). That party didn't last long. The consensus now is that for many jobs, hiring a person is easier/cheaper than hiring an AI agent. 

This has been my fear with agents all along: (1) what kind of agent truly needs to run automatically 24/7 and (2) how many tokens would this eat up needlessly. Side note: I got burned with cloud hosting on both Snowflake and Databricks for a personal project -- billed for cloud/GPU capacity that I wasn't using at all -- so I'm more sensitive than most to trusting tech companies with my credit card.

I've also consistently heard great things about Claude Co-Work. I've been tinkering with building my own tools for a while, and I had a moment of panic: is there any use in what I'm building, or am I reproducing things that Claude (and thousands of other smart developers) are already building?

ChatGPT helped drum up where the tradeoffs are. I put them below, as a reminder to myself that in-house tools -- ones that you know how they work, that link to the data you want, etc. -- have lasting value. Maybe not as a venture-backable company, but real time-saving workflow value. 

Anyways, here are the top dimensions where building your own software really shine over what Claude (or similar) offers. 

Dimension Claude / Chat UI Custom Pipeline
Time-to-value Extremely fast Slower
Repeatability Weak/moderate Strong
Flexibility Limited Full control
Structured data extraction   Okay Excellent
Audit trails Weak Strong
Multi-stage workflows Awkward Natural
Integration with database Limited Native
Cost at scale Can become expensive Often cheaper at volume
Vendor lock-in High Low
Human-in-loop review Limited Fully customizable

No comments:

Post a Comment

Progress on CRM

I wrote a few weeks ago that I had started to build a CRM tool. I've made pretty good progress, but I've realized that it's les...