Overview
GemKit's provider-agnostic architecture allows you to use either Gemini or Claude as the underlying AI engine. This flexibility lets you choose the best model for each task, compare provider performance, or leverage existing Claude investments while gaining GemKit's agent orchestration capabilities. Whether you're experimenting with dual-provider setups or migrating between ecosystems, this guide covers everything you need to know.
Why Use Claude with GemKit?
Use Cases for Dual-Provider Workflows
1. Model Strengths Optimization
- Gemini Flash: Fast research and simple code generation
- Claude Sonnet: Complex reasoning and architectural design
- Gemini Pro: Cost-effective general implementation
- Claude Opus: Critical systems requiring highest quality
2. Cost Optimization
- Route expensive tasks to Claude only when necessary
- Use Gemini for high-volume, low-complexity tasks
- Compare costs across providers for your specific use case
3. Redundancy and Reliability
- Fallback to alternative provider during outages
- A/B test provider performance on same tasks
- Avoid vendor lock-in
4. Best-of-Both-Worlds
- Leverage Claude's strength in complex reasoning
- Utilize Gemini's cost-effectiveness for scale
- Access both ecosystems' unique capabilities
Provider Architecture
GemKit abstracts AI providers behind a unified interface:
Key points:
- Same agent definitions work with both providers
- Automatic tool mapping between ecosystems
- Unified session management and analytics
- Model equivalence mapping built-in
Prerequisites
Required Software
API Keys
Make permanent:
Verify Setup
Configuration
Directory Structure
GemKit maintains parallel directory structures for each provider:
Best practice: Start with .gemini/ agents and convert to .claude/ as needed.
.gk.json Configuration
Spawning Agents with Claude
Basic Usage: The --cli Flag
The --cli flag tells GemKit which provider to use for that specific invocation.
Model Selection
With Context and Skills
Model Mapping Reference
GemKit automatically maps equivalent models between providers:
| Gemini Model | Claude Equivalent | Use Case | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemini-2.0-flash | claude-3-haiku | Fast tasks, high volume | $ |
| gemini-2.0-pro | claude-3-sonnet | Balanced performance | $$ |
| gemini-2.5-pro | claude-3-opus | Complex reasoning | $$$ |
| gemini-2.0-flash-8b | claude-3-haiku | Ultra-fast simple tasks | $ |
Customizing Model Mapping
Edit .gk.json to define custom mappings:
Dual-Provider Workflows
Pattern 1: Research with Gemini, Implement with Claude
Why this works:
- Gemini Flash is 3x cheaper and faster for research
- Claude Sonnet excels at complex implementation
- Total cost optimized while maintaining quality
Pattern 2: Parallel Implementation Comparison
Pattern 3: Cost-Optimized Feature Development
Usage:
Pattern 4: Fallback on Provider Error
Converting Agents Between Providers
Gemini to Claude
Claude to Gemini
See also: gk convert documentation
Tool Mapping
GemKit automatically maps tools between providers:
| Tool Function | Gemini Tool | Claude Tool |
|---|---|---|
| Read files | read_file | Read |
| Write files | write_file | Write |
| Edit files | replace | Edit |
| Run commands | run_shell_command | Bash |
| Search code | search_file_content | Grep |
| List files | glob | Glob |
| Web search | google_web_search | WebSearch |
Agent definitions are tool-agnostic - GemKit handles translation automatically.
Performance Comparison
Real-World Benchmarks
Based on internal testing with common development tasks:
| Task Type | Gemini Flash | Gemini Pro | Claude Sonnet | Claude Opus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simple CRUD | 8s ($0.03) | 12s ($0.08) | 15s ($0.12) | 22s ($0.28) |
| Complex algorithm | 25s ($0.12) | 32s ($0.22) | 28s ($0.18) | 35s ($0.42) |
| Refactoring | 18s ($0.08) | 24s ($0.16) | 22s ($0.14) | 30s ($0.35) |
| Test generation | 12s ($0.05) | 16s ($0.11) | 14s ($0.09) | 20s ($0.24) |
Insights:
- Gemini Flash: Best for speed and cost
- Claude Sonnet: Best quality/cost ratio
- Claude Opus: Highest quality, slowest, most expensive
- Gemini Pro: Balanced option
Cost Analysis
Provider Pricing (2026)
Gemini API:
- gemini-2.0-flash: $0.015/1K input, $0.025/1K output
- gemini-2.0-pro: $0.025/1K input, $0.050/1K output
- gemini-2.5-pro: $0.050/1K input, $0.100/1K output
Claude API:
- claude-3-haiku: $0.025/1K input, $0.125/1K output
- claude-3-sonnet: $0.300/1K input, $1.500/1K output
- claude-3-opus: $1.500/1K input, $7.500/1K output
Cost Optimization Strategy
Monitoring and Analytics
Track Usage by Provider
Cost Comparison Report
Best Practices
- Start with Gemini as default - Cheaper for most tasks, Claude when needed
- Use --cli flag strategically - Be explicit about provider choice per task
- Map models appropriately - Ensure quality expectations match chosen model
- Monitor costs per provider - Use
gk tokensto track spending patterns - Keep agents provider-agnostic - Design agents to work with both ecosystems
- Test on both providers - Compare quality and cost for your specific use cases
- Document provider choices - Note why specific providers chosen for tasks
- Use conversion sparingly - Only convert agents when truly needed for both
Troubleshooting
"Claude CLI not found"
"ANTHROPIC_API_KEY not set"
"Agent not found for Claude provider"
"Different results between providers"
- Normal - models have different strengths
- Adjust prompts for each provider's style
- Use more explicit instructions for consistency
Related Documentation
- gk convert - Convert agents between providers
- gk agent - Agent spawning and management
- gk tokens - Cost tracking across providers
- Configuration Reference - Provider settings
- Creating Custom Agents - Provider-agnostic agent design