from my understanding, you can run the inference server (llama.cpp/vllm/whatever) and the agent/harness in different contexts, event different machines.
The risky part is in the agent/harness and what tools it has access to.
You don't need to give GPU passthrough to the VM running the agent/harness.
There is still a risk of a prompt messing with the inference server, but I think that's a much lower risk compared to an agent doing whatever on its own.
Works with any mechanism to turn on and off nodes(IPMI, WoL...)
I have some nodes that I turn on and off via a curl to homeassistant to the power plug.
it's a transparent proxy that automatically launches your selected model with your preferred inference server so that you don't need to manually start/stop the server when you want to switch model
so, let's say I have configured roo code to use qwen3 30ba3b as the orchestrator and glm4.5 air as coder, roo code would call the proxy server with model "qwen3" when using orchestrator mode and then kill llama.cpp with qwen3 and restart it with "glm4.5air"
well, I tried it and it works for me. llm output is hard to properly evaluate without actually using it.
I read a lot of good comments on r/localllama, with most people suggesting qwen3 coder 30ba3b, but I never got it to work as well as GLM 4.5 air Q1.
As for using Q2, it will fit in vram, but with very small context or spill over to RAM, but with quite an impact on speed depending on your setup. I have slow ddr4 ram and going for Q1 has been a good compromise for me, but YMMV.
On my 2x 3090s I am running glm4.5 air q1 and it runs at ~300pp and 20/30 tk/s
works pretty well with roo code on vscode, rarely misses tool calls and produces decent quality code.
I also tried to use it with claude code with claude code router and it's pretty fast.
Roo code uses bigger contexts, so it's quite slower than claude code in general, but I like the workflow better.
The risky part is in the agent/harness and what tools it has access to.
You don't need to give GPU passthrough to the VM running the agent/harness.
There is still a risk of a prompt messing with the inference server, but I think that's a much lower risk compared to an agent doing whatever on its own.