Whiteboard Is an Open-Source IDE That Combines a Whiteboard, Software Diagrams, Code, and Agent Decision Trails in One Space
Whiteboard is an open-source IDE that combines a whiteboard, software diagrams, code, and agent decision trails in one space. It helps teams see the big picture of a system and understand the reasoning behind AI-generated code more deeply.
The main caveats are that file editing may still feel cumbersome, multi-repository workflows are limited, and AI model costs may increase with usage. It is therefore best suited to teams that value software thinking and planning more than coding alone.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
Whiteboard combines a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs in one view, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a design to the changes made in the code.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
Whiteboard combines a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs in one view, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a design to the changes made in the code.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
PRs and agent-generated code are arriving faster these days. Sometimes we can accept the changes without fully understanding where the system is heading. This is cognitive debt that accumulates quietly and makes the next debugging session riskier.
Whiteboard is useful because it creates a space to pause and examine the big picture before making changes. We can trace the reasoning behind the code, question assumptions, and discuss everything with the team using the same context, instead of rushing to approve and trying to catch up on our understanding afterward.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
PRs and agent-generated code are arriving faster these days. Sometimes we can accept the changes without fully understanding where the system is heading. This is cognitive debt that accumulates quietly and makes the next debugging session riskier.
Whiteboard is useful because it creates a space to pause and examine the big picture before making changes. We can trace the reasoning behind the code, question assumptions, and discuss everything with the team using the same context, instead of rushing to approve and trying to catch up on our understanding afterward.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that works with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents. Its main strength is helping organize ideas and evaluate options before letting an agent modify the code.
By category, Whiteboard sits somewhere between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It is not the primary place for writing code, but rather a layer for explaining structure, asking questions, and discussing work with the team using the same shared view.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that works with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents. Its main strength is helping organize ideas and evaluate options before letting an agent modify the code.
By category, Whiteboard sits somewhere between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It is not the primary place for writing code, but rather a layer for explaining structure, asking questions, and discussing work with the team using the same shared view.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version, which used HTML artifacts, was suitable for quickly drafting screens and explaining flows, but it remained separate from the actual source code. This made it more difficult to follow diffs or understand the impact on the system.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Source code integration | Separate from the actual code | Works closely with the actual code |
| Viewing diffs | Limited visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Agent workflows | Focused on explaining concepts | Helps modify and review code as actual tasks |
| Real system review | Best for discussing the big picture | Best for review before merging |
As a result, the new version of Whiteboard has moved beyond being an explanatory board to becoming a workspace where code and systems can be reviewed more practically.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version, which used HTML artifacts, was suitable for quickly drafting screens and explaining flows, but it remained separate from the actual source code. This made it more difficult to follow diffs or understand the impact on the system.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Source code integration | Separate from the actual code | Works closely with the actual code |
| Viewing diffs | Limited visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Agent workflows | Focused on explaining concepts | Helps modify and review code as actual tasks |
| Real system review | Best for discussing the big picture | Best for review before merging |
As a result, the new version of Whiteboard has moved beyond being an explanatory board to becoming a workspace where code and systems can be reviewed more practically.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code help connect the big picture with the real implementation without constantly switching tools.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from tests and documentation, making the important issues easier to identify.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces help you follow the reasoning and decision points step by step.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for explaining architecture collaboratively between people and agents, with everyone discussing the same visual context.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code help connect the big picture with the real implementation without constantly switching tools.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from tests and documentation, making the important issues easier to identify.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces help you follow the reasoning and decision points step by step.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for explaining architecture collaboratively between people and agents, with everyone discussing the same visual context.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecting code with design visuals | Deeply integrated in the same workflow | Possible through extensions and workflows | Focused more on code editing than visuals | Separate from code |
| Reviewing reasoning and decisions | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires additional tools | Primarily shows diffs and chat | Primarily reviews the visual |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Flexible but must be assembled manually | Easy to get started | Easy to start drawing |
Whiteboard is best suited to teams that want to discuss requirements, design visuals, and code within the same context. Code + coding agents or Cursor are better suited to people who already have an established workflow, while Excalidraw remains more convenient for quickly drawing diagrams.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecting code with design visuals | Deeply integrated in the same workflow | Possible through extensions and workflows | Focused more on code editing than visuals | Separate from code |
| Reviewing reasoning and decisions | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires additional tools | Primarily shows diffs and chat | Primarily reviews the visual |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Flexible but must be assembled manually | Easy to get started | Easy to start drawing |
Whiteboard is best suited to teams that want to discuss requirements, design visuals, and code within the same context. Code + coding agents or Cursor are better suited to people who already have an established workflow, while Excalidraw remains more convenient for quickly drawing diagrams.
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard is compelling because it is MIT-licensed open source, runs with code locally, and connects design visuals to source code. This helps reduce diff noise during discussions. Its limitations are that files still cannot be edited inside the app, multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source and runs with code locally
- +Connects design visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Files cannot yet be edited inside the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard is compelling because it is MIT-licensed open source, runs with code locally, and connects design visuals to source code. This helps reduce diff noise during discussions. Its limitations are that files still cannot be edited inside the app, multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source and runs with code locally
- +Connects design visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Files cannot yet be edited inside the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
The first cost is the time required to learn a new workflow, especially connecting design visuals with code and reviewing work in a local checkout. People already familiar with Git will probably adapt more easily, but the team still needs to agree clearly on how to use it together.
There is also the cost of AI models if you use features for brainstorming or reviewing work, along with the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app yourself. Local data management also requires attention to storage, access permissions, and duplicate data.
If you work across repositories, the complexity increases because support is not yet especially smooth. The inability to edit files in the app and the lack of automatic updates for shared reviews may require switching between tools and repeating work.
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
The first cost is the time required to learn a new workflow, especially connecting design visuals with code and reviewing work in a local checkout. People already familiar with Git will probably adapt more easily, but the team still needs to agree clearly on how to use it together.
There is also the cost of AI models if you use features for brainstorming or reviewing work, along with the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app yourself. Local data management also requires attention to storage, access permissions, and duplicate data.
If you work across repositories, the complexity increases because support is not yet especially smooth. The inability to edit files in the app and the lack of automatic updates for shared reviews may require switching between tools and repeating work.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is well suited to developers who work with coding agents and want to plan designs before writing code, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It helps organize ideas and discuss the reasoning behind decisions systematically.
People who want self-hosting may also find it worth trying, especially teams that prioritize data control and working within their own environment.
However, it may not be the right fit if you want a full-featured IDE for editing code. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or people who need real-time collaboration, since workflow and shared-review limitations remain.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is well suited to developers who work with coding agents and want to plan designs before writing code, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It helps organize ideas and discuss the reasoning behind decisions systematically.
People who want self-hosting may also find it worth trying, especially teams that prioritize data control and working within their own environment.
However, it may not be the right fit if you want a full-featured IDE for editing code. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or people who need real-time collaboration, since workflow and shared-review limitations remain.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
More capable tools do not necessarily mean that we will understand code more deeply. If Whiteboard helps us see diagrams, reasoning, and decision trails in one place, discussions about code may become clearer than when looking at files alone.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
More capable tools do not necessarily mean that we will understand code more deeply. If Whiteboard helps us see diagrams, reasoning, and decision trails in one place, discussions about code may become clearer than when looking at files alone.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
A single Whiteboard view may contain a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs side by side, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a change to what actually changed in the code.
The important point is that it tries to connect “thinking” with “doing.” The team can therefore see not only what changed in the code, but also revisit why that approach was chosen.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
A single Whiteboard view may contain a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs side by side, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a change to what actually changed in the code.
The important point is that it tries to connect “thinking” with “doing.” The team can therefore see not only what changed in the code, but also revisit why that approach was chosen.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
Lately, I have been receiving PRs and agent-generated code more frequently. Work is moving faster, but my understanding of the system is not keeping up. Cognitive debt has accumulated, and I have started to feel less confident before touching existing code.
Whiteboard is useful because it provides a place to pause and examine the big picture before deciding what to change. We can break down the problem, ask questions, and trace the system’s reasoning without having to rush into opening files and making changes immediately.
For work that is handed off between multiple people or agents, this approach helps turn guesswork into changes made with more context.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
Lately, I have been receiving PRs and agent-generated code more frequently. Work is moving faster, but my understanding of the system is not keeping up. Cognitive debt has accumulated, and I have started to feel less confident before touching existing code.
Whiteboard is useful because it provides a place to pause and examine the big picture before deciding what to change. We can break down the problem, ask questions, and trace the system’s reasoning without having to rush into opening files and making changes immediately.
For work that is handed off between multiple people or agents, this approach helps turn guesswork into changes made with more context.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that sits between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It supports working with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents in the same space.
It is not an IDE for writing all of your code, nor is it merely a drawing board. Instead, it is a space for understanding structure, talking with agents, and reviewing changes before making them. It is well suited to work that requires design and review at the same time.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that sits between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It supports working with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents in the same space.
It is not an IDE for writing all of your code, nor is it merely a drawing board. Instead, it is a space for understanding structure, talking with agents, and reviewing changes before making them. It is well suited to work that requires design and review at the same time.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version using HTML artifacts was suitable for drafting interfaces and organizing ideas, but it had limited connections to the actual source code. The current desktop app brings code, diffs, and agent workflows into the same space.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Connection to source code | Limited | Connected to the actual project |
| Viewing diffs | Incomplete visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Working with agents | Focused on simulating concepts | Discuss and assign tasks in the same space |
| Reviewing real systems | Best for drafting | Best for review before implementation |
The key change is that Whiteboard no longer stops at a draft. It connects ideas to real code, making it suitable for teams that want to discuss, design, and review work in the same cycle.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version using HTML artifacts was suitable for drafting interfaces and organizing ideas, but it had limited connections to the actual source code. The current desktop app brings code, diffs, and agent workflows into the same space.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Connection to source code | Limited | Connected to the actual project |
| Viewing diffs | Incomplete visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Working with agents | Focused on simulating concepts | Discuss and assign tasks in the same space |
| Reviewing real systems | Best for drafting | Best for review before implementation |
The key change is that Whiteboard no longer stops at a draft. It connects ideas to real code, making it suitable for teams that want to discuss, design, and review work in the same cycle.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code let you move from the big picture to the actual implementation immediately.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from intermingled test code and documentation, making it easier to focus on the important points.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces reveal the sequence of thought and reasoning behind each decision.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for discussing architecture collaboratively: humans draw, agents add detail, and the team reviews everything using the same visual context.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code let you move from the big picture to the actual implementation immediately.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from intermingled test code and documentation, making it easier to focus on the important points.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces reveal the sequence of thought and reasoning behind each decision.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for discussing architecture collaboratively: humans draw, agents add detail, and the team reviews everything using the same visual context.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
Whiteboard stands out by bringing code, requirements, and review into the same space. It is suitable for teams that need to discuss the reasoning behind a design before writing the actual code. Code + coding agents and Cursor are better suited when the primary task is directly editing code in a project.
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code integration | Deep and context-rich | Deep, focused on file editing | Deep, focused on file editing | Limited to diagrams |
| Design review | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires supplementary documentation | Requires supplementary documentation | Can review visuals but not the agent’s reasoning |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Requires assembling multiple tools | Easier to get started | Can start drawing immediately |
To be direct, Whiteboard does not replace an editor in every situation. It fills the thinking and review phase that coding tools often leave out.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
Whiteboard stands out by bringing code, requirements, and review into the same space. It is suitable for teams that need to discuss the reasoning behind a design before writing the actual code. Code + coding agents and Cursor are better suited when the primary task is directly editing code in a project.
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code integration | Deep and context-rich | Deep, focused on file editing | Deep, focused on file editing | Limited to diagrams |
| Design review | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires supplementary documentation | Requires supplementary documentation | Can review visuals but not the agent’s reasoning |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Requires assembling multiple tools | Easier to get started | Can start drawing immediately |
To be direct, Whiteboard does not replace an editor in every situation. It fills the thinking and review phase that coding tools often leave out.
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard’s strengths include being MIT-licensed open source and working with code locally. Connecting planned visuals to source code helps reviews retain the big picture and significantly reduces diff noise.
Its limitations are that you still need to switch to an editor to modify files, multi-repository support is not yet smooth, and shared reviews do not update automatically. If the team continues editing code after sending a review, people opening the link may see outdated information.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source
- +Connects visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Cannot edit files in the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard’s strengths include being MIT-licensed open source and working with code locally. Connecting planned visuals to source code helps reviews retain the big picture and significantly reduces diff noise.
Its limitations are that you still need to switch to an editor to modify files, multi-repository support is not yet smooth, and shared reviews do not update automatically. If the team continues editing code after sending a review, people opening the link may see outdated information.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source
- +Connects visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Cannot edit files in the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
Whiteboard may not have a license fee, but the team pays with the time required to learn a new workflow—especially moving from reviewing code in the usual way to designing through a whiteboard and connecting it to a local checkout.
If you use AI features, there are model costs based on actual usage, as well as the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app. Data in the local checkout also needs to be managed manually, and work spanning multiple repositories may require switching contexts several times.
Incomplete features mean that some tasks still require returning to existing tools or repeating steps. The real cost therefore lies more in time and complexity than in the download itself.
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
Whiteboard may not have a license fee, but the team pays with the time required to learn a new workflow—especially moving from reviewing code in the usual way to designing through a whiteboard and connecting it to a local checkout.
If you use AI features, there are model costs based on actual usage, as well as the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app. Data in the local checkout also needs to be managed manually, and work spanning multiple repositories may require switching contexts several times.
Incomplete features mean that some tasks still require returning to existing tools or repeating steps. The real cost therefore lies more in time and complexity than in the download itself.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is suitable for developers who work with coding agents and want to visualize their software plans before implementation, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It provides a structured space for discussing reasoning and connecting ideas to code.
People who want self-hosting also have good reason to try it, especially teams that want to control their own data and environment. However, Whiteboard may still not be the right fit if you want a full-featured coding IDE. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or requiring real-time collaboration; existing tools may be more convenient.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is suitable for developers who work with coding agents and want to visualize their software plans before implementation, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It provides a structured space for discussing reasoning and connecting ideas to code.
People who want self-hosting also have good reason to try it, especially teams that want to control their own data and environment. However, Whiteboard may still not be the right fit if you want a full-featured coding IDE. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or requiring real-time collaboration; existing tools may be more convenient.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
Tools that organize code more effectively do not automatically make the reasoning behind the code clearer. If the team still cannot explain decisions, assess their impact, or trace their origins, the problem has merely been hidden behind a more orderly interface.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
Tools that organize code more effectively do not automatically make the reasoning behind the code clearer. If the team still cannot explain decisions, assess their impact, or trace their origins, the problem has merely been hidden behind a more orderly interface.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Whiteboard Is an Open-Source IDE That Combines a Whiteboard, Software Diagrams, Code, and Agent Decision Trails in One Space
Whiteboard is an open-source IDE that combines a whiteboard, software diagrams, code, and agent decision trails in one space. It helps teams see the big picture of a system and understand the reasoning behind AI-generated code more deeply.
The main caveats are that file editing may still feel cumbersome, multi-repository workflows are limited, and AI model costs may increase with usage. It is therefore best suited to teams that value software thinking and planning more than coding alone.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
Whiteboard combines a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs in one view, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a design to the changes made in the code.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
Whiteboard combines a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs in one view, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a design to the changes made in the code.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
PRs and agent-generated code are arriving faster these days. Sometimes we can accept the changes without fully understanding where the system is heading. This is cognitive debt that accumulates quietly and makes the next debugging session riskier.
Whiteboard is useful because it creates a space to pause and examine the big picture before making changes. We can trace the reasoning behind the code, question assumptions, and discuss everything with the team using the same context, instead of rushing to approve and trying to catch up on our understanding afterward.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
PRs and agent-generated code are arriving faster these days. Sometimes we can accept the changes without fully understanding where the system is heading. This is cognitive debt that accumulates quietly and makes the next debugging session riskier.
Whiteboard is useful because it creates a space to pause and examine the big picture before making changes. We can trace the reasoning behind the code, question assumptions, and discuss everything with the team using the same context, instead of rushing to approve and trying to catch up on our understanding afterward.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that works with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents. Its main strength is helping organize ideas and evaluate options before letting an agent modify the code.
By category, Whiteboard sits somewhere between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It is not the primary place for writing code, but rather a layer for explaining structure, asking questions, and discussing work with the team using the same shared view.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that works with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents. Its main strength is helping organize ideas and evaluate options before letting an agent modify the code.
By category, Whiteboard sits somewhere between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It is not the primary place for writing code, but rather a layer for explaining structure, asking questions, and discussing work with the team using the same shared view.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version, which used HTML artifacts, was suitable for quickly drafting screens and explaining flows, but it remained separate from the actual source code. This made it more difficult to follow diffs or understand the impact on the system.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Source code integration | Separate from the actual code | Works closely with the actual code |
| Viewing diffs | Limited visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Agent workflows | Focused on explaining concepts | Helps modify and review code as actual tasks |
| Real system review | Best for discussing the big picture | Best for review before merging |
As a result, the new version of Whiteboard has moved beyond being an explanatory board to becoming a workspace where code and systems can be reviewed more practically.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version, which used HTML artifacts, was suitable for quickly drafting screens and explaining flows, but it remained separate from the actual source code. This made it more difficult to follow diffs or understand the impact on the system.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Source code integration | Separate from the actual code | Works closely with the actual code |
| Viewing diffs | Limited visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Agent workflows | Focused on explaining concepts | Helps modify and review code as actual tasks |
| Real system review | Best for discussing the big picture | Best for review before merging |
As a result, the new version of Whiteboard has moved beyond being an explanatory board to becoming a workspace where code and systems can be reviewed more practically.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code help connect the big picture with the real implementation without constantly switching tools.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from tests and documentation, making the important issues easier to identify.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces help you follow the reasoning and decision points step by step.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for explaining architecture collaboratively between people and agents, with everyone discussing the same visual context.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code help connect the big picture with the real implementation without constantly switching tools.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from tests and documentation, making the important issues easier to identify.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces help you follow the reasoning and decision points step by step.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for explaining architecture collaboratively between people and agents, with everyone discussing the same visual context.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecting code with design visuals | Deeply integrated in the same workflow | Possible through extensions and workflows | Focused more on code editing than visuals | Separate from code |
| Reviewing reasoning and decisions | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires additional tools | Primarily shows diffs and chat | Primarily reviews the visual |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Flexible but must be assembled manually | Easy to get started | Easy to start drawing |
Whiteboard is best suited to teams that want to discuss requirements, design visuals, and code within the same context. Code + coding agents or Cursor are better suited to people who already have an established workflow, while Excalidraw remains more convenient for quickly drawing diagrams.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecting code with design visuals | Deeply integrated in the same workflow | Possible through extensions and workflows | Focused more on code editing than visuals | Separate from code |
| Reviewing reasoning and decisions | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires additional tools | Primarily shows diffs and chat | Primarily reviews the visual |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Flexible but must be assembled manually | Easy to get started | Easy to start drawing |
Whiteboard is best suited to teams that want to discuss requirements, design visuals, and code within the same context. Code + coding agents or Cursor are better suited to people who already have an established workflow, while Excalidraw remains more convenient for quickly drawing diagrams.
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard is compelling because it is MIT-licensed open source, runs with code locally, and connects design visuals to source code. This helps reduce diff noise during discussions. Its limitations are that files still cannot be edited inside the app, multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source and runs with code locally
- +Connects design visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Files cannot yet be edited inside the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard is compelling because it is MIT-licensed open source, runs with code locally, and connects design visuals to source code. This helps reduce diff noise during discussions. Its limitations are that files still cannot be edited inside the app, multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source and runs with code locally
- +Connects design visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Files cannot yet be edited inside the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
The first cost is the time required to learn a new workflow, especially connecting design visuals with code and reviewing work in a local checkout. People already familiar with Git will probably adapt more easily, but the team still needs to agree clearly on how to use it together.
There is also the cost of AI models if you use features for brainstorming or reviewing work, along with the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app yourself. Local data management also requires attention to storage, access permissions, and duplicate data.
If you work across repositories, the complexity increases because support is not yet especially smooth. The inability to edit files in the app and the lack of automatic updates for shared reviews may require switching between tools and repeating work.
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
The first cost is the time required to learn a new workflow, especially connecting design visuals with code and reviewing work in a local checkout. People already familiar with Git will probably adapt more easily, but the team still needs to agree clearly on how to use it together.
There is also the cost of AI models if you use features for brainstorming or reviewing work, along with the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app yourself. Local data management also requires attention to storage, access permissions, and duplicate data.
If you work across repositories, the complexity increases because support is not yet especially smooth. The inability to edit files in the app and the lack of automatic updates for shared reviews may require switching between tools and repeating work.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is well suited to developers who work with coding agents and want to plan designs before writing code, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It helps organize ideas and discuss the reasoning behind decisions systematically.
People who want self-hosting may also find it worth trying, especially teams that prioritize data control and working within their own environment.
However, it may not be the right fit if you want a full-featured IDE for editing code. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or people who need real-time collaboration, since workflow and shared-review limitations remain.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is well suited to developers who work with coding agents and want to plan designs before writing code, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It helps organize ideas and discuss the reasoning behind decisions systematically.
People who want self-hosting may also find it worth trying, especially teams that prioritize data control and working within their own environment.
However, it may not be the right fit if you want a full-featured IDE for editing code. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or people who need real-time collaboration, since workflow and shared-review limitations remain.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
More capable tools do not necessarily mean that we will understand code more deeply. If Whiteboard helps us see diagrams, reasoning, and decision trails in one place, discussions about code may become clearer than when looking at files alone.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
More capable tools do not necessarily mean that we will understand code more deeply. If Whiteboard helps us see diagrams, reasoning, and decision trails in one place, discussions about code may become clearer than when looking at files alone.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
A single Whiteboard view may contain a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs side by side, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a change to what actually changed in the code.
The important point is that it tries to connect “thinking” with “doing.” The team can therefore see not only what changed in the code, but also revisit why that approach was chosen.
Whiteboard in a Single Frame
A single Whiteboard view may contain a canvas, system diagrams, code, and semantic diffs side by side, making it possible to see everything from the reasoning behind a change to what actually changed in the code.
The important point is that it tries to connect “thinking” with “doing.” The team can therefore see not only what changed in the code, but also revisit why that approach was chosen.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
Lately, I have been receiving PRs and agent-generated code more frequently. Work is moving faster, but my understanding of the system is not keeping up. Cognitive debt has accumulated, and I have started to feel less confident before touching existing code.
Whiteboard is useful because it provides a place to pause and examine the big picture before deciding what to change. We can break down the problem, ask questions, and trace the system’s reasoning without having to rush into opening files and making changes immediately.
For work that is handed off between multiple people or agents, this approach helps turn guesswork into changes made with more context.
When Code Moves Faster Than Understanding
Lately, I have been receiving PRs and agent-generated code more frequently. Work is moving faster, but my understanding of the system is not keeping up. Cognitive debt has accumulated, and I have started to feel less confident before touching existing code.
Whiteboard is useful because it provides a place to pause and examine the big picture before deciding what to change. We can break down the problem, ask questions, and trace the system’s reasoning without having to rush into opening files and making changes immediately.
For work that is handed off between multiple people or agents, this approach helps turn guesswork into changes made with more context.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that sits between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It supports working with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents in the same space.
It is not an IDE for writing all of your code, nor is it merely a drawing board. Instead, it is a space for understanding structure, talking with agents, and reviewing changes before making them. It is well suited to work that requires design and review at the same time.
Where Whiteboard Fits in the Developer Tool Landscape
Whiteboard is an open-source desktop app from dev.fast that sits between an IDE, a diagramming tool, and a code review system. It supports working with Claude Code, Codex, and other coding agents in the same space.
It is not an IDE for writing all of your code, nor is it merely a drawing board. Instead, it is a space for understanding structure, talking with agents, and reviewing changes before making them. It is well suited to work that requires design and review at the same time.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version using HTML artifacts was suitable for drafting interfaces and organizing ideas, but it had limited connections to the actual source code. The current desktop app brings code, diffs, and agent workflows into the same space.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Connection to source code | Limited | Connected to the actual project |
| Viewing diffs | Incomplete visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Working with agents | Focused on simulating concepts | Discuss and assign tasks in the same space |
| Reviewing real systems | Best for drafting | Best for review before implementation |
The key change is that Whiteboard no longer stops at a draft. It connects ideas to real code, making it suitable for teams that want to discuss, design, and review work in the same cycle.
From HTML Artifacts to an IDE That Works with Real Code
The early version using HTML artifacts was suitable for drafting interfaces and organizing ideas, but it had limited connections to the actual source code. The current desktop app brings code, diffs, and agent workflows into the same space.
| Factor | Early HTML artifacts | Current desktop app |
|---|---|---|
| Connection to source code | Limited | Connected to the actual project |
| Viewing diffs | Incomplete visibility | Changes can be reviewed clearly |
| Working with agents | Focused on simulating concepts | Discuss and assign tasks in the same space |
| Reviewing real systems | Best for drafting | Best for review before implementation |
The key change is that Whiteboard no longer stops at a draft. It connects ideas to real code, making it suitable for teams that want to discuss, design, and review work in the same cycle.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code let you move from the big picture to the actual implementation immediately.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from intermingled test code and documentation, making it easier to focus on the important points.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces reveal the sequence of thought and reasoning behind each decision.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for discussing architecture collaboratively: humans draw, agents add detail, and the team reviews everything using the same visual context.
Features That Start to Matter in Real-World Situations
When you need to understand a legacy system before making changes, sequence diagrams and ERDs that can link back to the code let you move from the big picture to the actual implementation immediately.
When reviewing a large PR, AST-aware semantic diffs help separate code changes from intermingled test code and documentation, making it easier to focus on the important points.
If you need to check how an agent interpreted a requirement, decision logs and agent traces reveal the sequence of thought and reasoning behind each decision.
The SDK that allows agents to draw on the canvas is useful for discussing architecture collaboratively: humans draw, agents add detail, and the team reviews everything using the same visual context.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
Whiteboard stands out by bringing code, requirements, and review into the same space. It is suitable for teams that need to discuss the reasoning behind a design before writing the actual code. Code + coding agents and Cursor are better suited when the primary task is directly editing code in a project.
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code integration | Deep and context-rich | Deep, focused on file editing | Deep, focused on file editing | Limited to diagrams |
| Design review | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires supplementary documentation | Requires supplementary documentation | Can review visuals but not the agent’s reasoning |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Requires assembling multiple tools | Easier to get started | Can start drawing immediately |
To be direct, Whiteboard does not replace an editor in every situation. It fills the thinking and review phase that coding tools often leave out.
Whiteboard Compared with Tools Developers Already Use
Whiteboard stands out by bringing code, requirements, and review into the same space. It is suitable for teams that need to discuss the reasoning behind a design before writing the actual code. Code + coding agents and Cursor are better suited when the primary task is directly editing code in a project.
| Factor | Whiteboard | Code + coding agent | Cursor | Excalidraw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code integration | Deep and context-rich | Deep, focused on file editing | Deep, focused on file editing | Limited to diagrams |
| Design review | Includes decision logs and agent traces | Requires supplementary documentation | Requires supplementary documentation | Can review visuals but not the agent’s reasoning |
| Setup burden | Requires learning a new workflow | Requires assembling multiple tools | Easier to get started | Can start drawing immediately |
To be direct, Whiteboard does not replace an editor in every situation. It fills the thinking and review phase that coding tools often leave out.
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard’s strengths include being MIT-licensed open source and working with code locally. Connecting planned visuals to source code helps reviews retain the big picture and significantly reduces diff noise.
Its limitations are that you still need to switch to an editor to modify files, multi-repository support is not yet smooth, and shared reviews do not update automatically. If the team continues editing code after sending a review, people opening the link may see outdated information.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source
- +Connects visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Cannot edit files in the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Strengths That Make the Concept Interesting—and the Rough Edges That Remain
Whiteboard’s strengths include being MIT-licensed open source and working with code locally. Connecting planned visuals to source code helps reviews retain the big picture and significantly reduces diff noise.
Its limitations are that you still need to switch to an editor to modify files, multi-repository support is not yet smooth, and shared reviews do not update automatically. If the team continues editing code after sending a review, people opening the link may see outdated information.
Pros
- +MIT-licensed open source
- +Connects visuals with source code and reduces diff noise
Cons
- −Cannot edit files in the app
- −Multi-repository support is still weak, and shared reviews do not update automatically
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
Whiteboard may not have a license fee, but the team pays with the time required to learn a new workflow—especially moving from reviewing code in the usual way to designing through a whiteboard and connecting it to a local checkout.
If you use AI features, there are model costs based on actual usage, as well as the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app. Data in the local checkout also needs to be managed manually, and work spanning multiple repositories may require switching contexts several times.
Incomplete features mean that some tasks still require returning to existing tools or repeating steps. The real cost therefore lies more in time and complexity than in the download itself.
Costs That Do Not Appear on the Download Page
Whiteboard may not have a license fee, but the team pays with the time required to learn a new workflow—especially moving from reviewing code in the usual way to designing through a whiteboard and connecting it to a local checkout.
If you use AI features, there are model costs based on actual usage, as well as the time required to install, update, and maintain the desktop app. Data in the local checkout also needs to be managed manually, and work spanning multiple repositories may require switching contexts several times.
Incomplete features mean that some tasks still require returning to existing tools or repeating steps. The real cost therefore lies more in time and complexity than in the download itself.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is suitable for developers who work with coding agents and want to visualize their software plans before implementation, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It provides a structured space for discussing reasoning and connecting ideas to code.
People who want self-hosting also have good reason to try it, especially teams that want to control their own data and environment. However, Whiteboard may still not be the right fit if you want a full-featured coding IDE. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or requiring real-time collaboration; existing tools may be more convenient.
Who Benefits Most from Whiteboard
Whiteboard is suitable for developers who work with coding agents and want to visualize their software plans before implementation, as well as teams that need to review complex architectures or PRs. It provides a structured space for discussing reasoning and connecting ideas to code.
People who want self-hosting also have good reason to try it, especially teams that want to control their own data and environment. However, Whiteboard may still not be the right fit if you want a full-featured coding IDE. The same applies to teams working across multiple repositories at once or requiring real-time collaboration; existing tools may be more convenient.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
Tools that organize code more effectively do not automatically make the reasoning behind the code clearer. If the team still cannot explain decisions, assess their impact, or trace their origins, the problem has merely been hidden behind a more orderly interface.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.
Better Tools Do Not Always Mean Better Understanding of Code
Tools that organize code more effectively do not automatically make the reasoning behind the code clearer. If the team still cannot explain decisions, assess their impact, or trace their origins, the problem has merely been hidden behind a more orderly interface.
Whiteboard is not competing on coding speed. Instead, it proposes a new workflow in which explaining, verifying, and remembering the reasons behind changes become part of software development. Try it with a single PR review first, then decide how well its value fits your team.