Is orchestrating the official Antigravity CLI from a local multi-agent coding application allowed?

Google Antigravity
1

Hi

I would like an official clarification from a Google/Antigravity team member regarding the Antigravity Terms of Service and the documented headless use of the official “agy” CLI.

I am developing a personal, local desktop coding application called Axiom Agentic Workspace.

Its architecture is roughly

User → Axiom → Codex App Server for planning → official Antigravity CLI for implementation → Codex App Server for review

For the Antigravity integration, Axiom would

- launch the official, unmodified “agy” executable as a local subprocess

- use the documented headless structured interface, such as “stream-json” / JSON output

- let the official Antigravity CLI handle its own Google account authentication

- use the quota/models legitimately available through my Google AI/Antigravity subscription

- not require an Antigravity/Gemini API key

- never read, copy, export, intercept, store, or reuse OAuth tokens, refresh tokens, cookies, or other authentication material

- never call private or undocumented Antigravity backend endpoints

- never impersonate or reimplement the Antigravity client

- never bypass or attempt to increase subscription quotas

- only select models that the authenticated official CLI reports as available to my account

- send implementation instructions to the CLI and consume its structured events/results

- run the CLI inside an isolated local Git worktree/sandbox

Another coding agent may prepare the implementation plan and later review the resulting code, but that agent would not receive Antigravity credentials and would not communicate with Antigravity directly. All Antigravity access would still happen through the official “agy” process.

So, concretely, the integration would look like

“Axiom → spawn official agy CLI → Antigravity service”

rather than

“Axiom → Antigravity private API/OAuth”

My questions are

1. Is this an allowed use of the Antigravity subscription and the official headless CLI?

2. Does a local third-party application orchestrating the official “agy” subprocess count as prohibited “third-party software accessing the Service,” even though the actual service access and authentication are performed exclusively by the official Antigravity CLI?

3. Is it permitted for another local coding agent to act as planner/reviewer while the official Antigravity CLI acts as the implementation agent?

4. Can this architecture legitimately consume the quota included with my Antigravity/Google AI subscription, without using an API key?

I am specifically trying to distinguish this from tools that extract/reuse Antigravity OAuth credentials or directly access Antigravity backend APIs. Axiom would do neither.

I found previous community discussions suggesting that launching the official CLI as a subprocess may be acceptable, but because account suspension is a potential concern, I would appreciate an explicit confirmation from a Google/Antigravity team member for this exact architecture.

Thank you

2

Hi @Zythenth, Welcome to the Forum!

  1. Yes. Spawning the official CLI locally using documented structured flags (stream-json / --json) for single-user workflows is permitted.
  2. Compliant. Because you execute the unmodified binary and let it manage its own authentication via stdio (without extracting tokens or calling private backend APIs), it does not violate third-party access restrictions.
  3. Yes. Using an external agent as a planner/reviewer while delegating implementation to agy via local Git/stdio is standard agentic architecture.
  4. Yes. An authenticated CLI session (agy auth login) automatically uses your subscription plan’s quotas without requiring an API key.