OpenAI background mode vs Sume Agent Completions: polling
Both let you start a long job and poll for it. OpenAI background mode returns a response id; Sume returns an agrun_ receipt and needs a required spend cap.

OpenAI's background mode and Sume Agent Completions both start a long job, return an id, and let you poll until it is done. The differences are in what you poll for, how you cancel, whether you can stream, and what a spend limit looks like.
This is a comparison of two asynchronous patterns, not of the work they do: one returns model output, the other returns generated video and other media.
Neither design is better in the abstract. They serve different jobs, and the useful comparison is about what you must build around each.
How each one starts
On OpenAI's page, read 2026-10-10, you set background to true on a Responses API call. Responses move through queued and in_progress and then reach a terminal state such as completed, failed, or cancelled. You poll with GET requests by response id while the state is queued or in_progress.
On Sume, POST /v1/agent/completions returns 202 with an agrun_ receipt. You poll GET /v1/agent-runs/{id} or its status route, or you supply communication.webhook_url and let a signed webhook arrive. See Agent Completions.
Cancel, stream, retain
OpenAI documents cancel as idempotent, with a second call returning the final response object. Sume's cancel is also idempotent, and you pay for generation completed before the cancel.
OpenAI supports streaming a background response by setting stream to true and resuming with a sequence_number and starting_after. Sume has no streaming on Agent Completions, so you either poll or wait for the webhook. OpenAI also documents data retention caveats for zero data retention projects; Sume's docs make no equivalent statement that we can cite here, so check your own requirements before relying on either.
| Question | OpenAI background mode | Sume Agent Completions |
|---|---|---|
| How you start it | background: true on a response | POST /v1/agent/completions |
| What you get back | A response that is queued or in_progress | 202 receipt with an agrun_ id |
| Terminal states | completed, failed, cancelled | completed, failed, canceled, skipped on run families |
| Streaming | Yes, with sequence_number | No |
| Spend limit on the request | Not described on that page | generation_spend_cap_usd, required |
| Push notification | Not described on that page | Signed webhook |
Which to reach for
If you want text or structured model output and can tolerate a slower first token, background mode on the Responses API fits. If you want a finished video, images, or audio produced by a video agent, and a hard dollar ceiling per request, Agent Completions is the Sume path.
You can also use both: a model-side step that plans or summarizes, and a Sume step that produces the media, joined by your own code and a run index.
For a product, the practical difference is cost control. A background response is bounded by tokens and time; an agent run is bounded by the generation cap you set, which is the number your finance team cares about.
What to build either way
Poll with a backoff and a deadline, store the id before anything else, handle the cancel path, and decide what happens on timeout. With Sume, add a webhook with signature verification and dedupe on request_id, and keep the cap as a number you control in code.
Sources
Related posts
More in Comparisons
- OpenAI TTS has Opus, AAC and FLAC; Sume TTS has MP3, WAV and raw
OpenAI's speech API lists six output formats. Sume TTS 1.0 returns MP3, WAV or raw PCM, so Opus, AAC and FLAC need a conversion step after generation.
- Poster headline in the image: Ideogram 4.5 or Nano Banana 2.1 on Sume?
Both vendors pitch readable text in images. On Sume, Ideogram 4.5 starts at $0.0375 and Nano Banana 2.1 at $0.075. Compare price, ratios and reference limits.
- Qwen Image Max vs Qwen Image on Sume: 3.75x the price, no references
On Sume, Qwen Image Max bills $0.09375 per image and is text-only, while Qwen Image bills $0.025 and takes up to 10 references. Both list 13 aspect ratios.
- Recraft V4 vs FLUX.2 Pro on Sume: $0.05 text-only vs $0.0375 with refs
On Sume, Recraft V4 bills $0.05 per image, is text-only and returns webp only. FLUX.2 Pro bills $0.0375 and takes 10 references. Both list 13 ratios.
Written by Sume