Guide

Linear + Claude Code: How to Connect Them Today (and the Shortcut)

You can assign a Linear issue to Cursor or Codex, but not to Claude Code, there's no native integration yet. Here are the three setups that actually work in July 2026, with the honest tradeoffs of each.

By Kylian Migot · Updated July 2026 · 8 min read

Quick answer

There is no native Linear integration for Claude Code as of July 2026. Three working setups: Linear's MCP server lets Claude Code sessions read and update issues; a bridge like Cyrus (open source) delegates Linear issues to Claude Code for you; or move agent execution to AIDEN's board and keep Linear for company-level planning.
Native integration
None, Linear's agent directory has Cursor, Codex, Devin; not Claude Code
Option A
Linear MCP server: issue context and updates inside Claude Code sessions
Option B
A bridge like Cyrus (open source): full issue-to-agent delegation
Option C
AIDEN: board + agents in one app, Linear stays for planning
01

The Integration Gap, Stated Factually

Linear has leaned hard into agents: its agent directory lets you assign issues directly to Cursor, OpenAI Codex, Devin, and others, and for those tools the loop is genuinely native, delegate an issue in Linear, get work back. Claude Code is not in that directory as of July 2026. There is an open feature request for the integration on the Claude Code GitHub repo, which tells you two things: demand exists, and nothing official has shipped.

So teams running Claude Code, by many accounts one of the most widely used coding agents, face an odd asymmetry: their tracker speaks natively to their agent's competitors, but not to their agent. Everything that follows is about closing that gap with what exists today. The general pattern, issue to agent to PR, across trackers is covered in how to assign tasks to AI agents.

02

Option A: Linear's MCP Server

Linear ships an official MCP server, and Claude Code speaks MCP natively. Connecting the two gives every Claude Code session read and write access to your Linear workspace: the session can pull an issue's description and comments as context, update its status, and comment with progress. It is the lowest-friction option because it uses only first-party pieces, no third-party service in the middle.

  1. 1

    Add Linear's MCP server to Claude Code

    Register the server in your Claude Code MCP configuration, the same way you add any MCP server. Linear's docs cover the current endpoint and setup; our MCP guide covers how Claude Code manages server configs.
  2. 2

    Authenticate with your Linear account

    On first use you authorize the connection against your Linear workspace, so sessions act with your permissions, they see the teams and issues you see.
  3. 3

    Reference issue IDs in your prompts

    From then on, prompts like "implement ENG-142, then mark it In Review and summarize what you changed in a comment" work: the session fetches the issue itself and writes its updates back.

The honest limit: this is context, not delegation. The session knows about Linear, but you still open every session, supervise it, and manage branches yourself, and nothing in Linear shows that an agent is working the issue beyond the comments it leaves. Setup details for MCP generally live in MCP servers for AI coding.

Ship your first agent today

Download AIDEN free and point it at your existing Claude Code or Codex setup. No credit card, running in minutes.

Download AIDEN free

Free to start · macOS 12+ · No credit card required

03

Option B: A Bridge Like Cyrus

If you want real delegation, assign an issue in Linear, agent picks it up, the missing native integration can be approximated by a bridge. Cyrus is the notable one: open source, it listens for Linear issues delegated to it and runs Claude Code against them, posting progress back to the issue. Functionally, it is the closest thing to Claude Code being in Linear's agent directory today.

What you gain

The native-feeling loop: delegate in Linear, get Claude Code output back on the issue, without anyone leaving the tracker. For teams whose entire process lives in Linear, that's the whole ask.

What you take on

A dependency between your tracker and your agents that neither vendor maintains. You host it, you upgrade it when Claude Code or Linear's API changes, and you debug it when delegation silently stops. Open source means you can fix it, it also means you're the one fixing it.

Where it fits

Teams with the infrastructure appetite to run a small service, who are committed to Linear as the single surface for all work, human and agent alike.

Where it strains

The execution side stays thin: Linear issues weren't designed to carry specs, worktree state, or diff review, so the agent lifecycle gets squeezed into comments. That gap is the argument for Option C.
04

Option C: The Shortcut, Board and Agents in One App

The third option questions the premise. Options A and B work to connect a tracker that doesn't know about Claude Code to an agent that doesn't know about Linear. AIDEN skips the bridge entirely by putting the board and the agents in one app: stories live on a kanban board, each gets a written spec you approve, and your Claude Code (or Codex) CLI executes each one on its own worktree, with the diff reviewed on the same card. Nothing to glue, because there is no seam.

In practice this is rarely Linear-versus-AIDEN. Teams keep Linear for what it is genuinely best at, company-level planning: roadmaps, cycles, cross-functional visibility, while the agent lane runs on AIDEN's board: a high-priority Linear item becomes an AIDEN story, an agent implements it behind the spec gate, the PR merges, the Linear issue closes. The tracker plans; the board executes. When a team does want one system, the tradeoffs are laid out in Linear alternative for AI teams, and why agent work wants a tracker shaped differently from a human one is the subject of issue tracking for AI agents.

What the execution side actually needs, specs as first-class objects, a worktree per story, sessions as visible cards, review as a column, is exactly what issue comments can't carry, and it is covered in Claude Code orchestration. AIDEN is free for one project, so running the Linear-plans, AIDEN-executes split costs nothing to try.

FAQ

Does Linear have a native Claude Code integration?
Not as of July 2026. Linear's agent directory includes Cursor, OpenAI Codex, Devin, and others you can assign issues to directly, but Claude Code is not among them, and an open feature request for exactly this sits on the Claude Code GitHub repo. Today the connection runs through Linear's MCP server, a third-party bridge like Cyrus, or a workflow change.
Can I assign a Linear issue to Claude Code?
Not natively, assignment-style delegation from inside Linear requires an agent in Linear's directory, and Claude Code isn't there. The closest equivalents: Cyrus, an open-source bridge that listens for Linear issues delegated to it and runs Claude Code against them; or the manual version, where you connect Linear's MCP server to Claude Code and reference issue IDs in your prompts so the session reads the issue itself.
What does Linear's MCP server let Claude Code do?
It gives a Claude Code session read and write access to your Linear workspace: pulling an issue's description and comments as context, updating status, adding comments. You add the server to Claude Code's MCP configuration, authenticate with your Linear account, and then reference issues naturally in prompts. What it does not do is delegation, you still start and supervise every session yourself.
What is Cyrus?
Cyrus is an open-source bridge that connects Linear to Claude Code: it watches for issues delegated to it in Linear and runs Claude Code sessions against them, posting progress back to the issue. It is the closest thing to a native integration today. The tradeoff is operational: it's a third-party service you host and maintain yourself, sitting between your tracker and your agents.
Should my team replace Linear with AIDEN?
Usually not, and that's not the pitch. Linear is excellent at company-level planning: roadmaps, cycles, cross-team visibility. What teams move to AIDEN is agent execution, the slice of work where the assignee is a coding agent and the issue needs a spec, a worktree, and a diff review. Many run both: Linear for planning, AIDEN for the agent lane. Our Linear alternative page covers when full replacement does make sense.

Keep reading

Skip the bridge.

AIDEN puts the board and the agents in one app: stories with specs, Claude Code and Codex executing on worktrees, review built in. Free for one project.

macOS 12+ · Bring your own Claude Code or Codex · Your code stays local