The thing that's always bugged me about AI coding tools is that they're isolated. Your editor doesn't know what docs you have open. Your terminal AI doesn't know what file you're editing. You end up copy pasting context between five different windows just to ask a simple question.
Kit is my attempt to solve that. It's a single desktop window with a code editor (CodeMirror 6), a real Chromium browser, a terminal, a git panel, and an autonomous agent and they all share context. The AI in the terminal can read the page you have open. The agent uses your actual project files, not a blank slate.
The agent is the part I'm most curious to get feedback on. You give it a task in plain English, it plans and executes in a loop using file read/write, shell commands and project search. Every destructive action asks permission before running. You can drop a .kitrules or AGENT.md into any project and it reads your conventions at the start of every task.
There's also a visual pipeline builder called Stairs for chaining AI prompts, shell commands, HTTP requests and file ops together — handy for recurring workflows.
Works with OpenAI and Anthropic keys. MIT licensed, macOS and Linux.
GitHub: https://github.com/raiyanyahya/kit
Site: https://thekit.dev
Supercool
Thank you
The product is pulling toward infra faster than the current name suggests.
“Kit” is clean, but too generic for what this is becoming.
Once the product moves past “AI dev workspace” and into shared execution context across editor, browser, terminal, and agent, the value shifts from utility to infrastructure.
That usually changes what the name needs to do.
Not “helpful dev tool”
More “core execution layer”
Because the thing that’s sticky here isn’t the UI.
It’s the shared context model underneath it.
That’s the part teams will actually adopt into workflow.
And that layer usually wants a name with more ownability than Kit.
Vroth.com would frame this much closer to infra.
Xevoa.com also fits if you want it to feel more productized.