Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | act | Hurl | Lazygit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | GitHub | Universal | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Stars | 72437 | 19271 | 83385 |
| Last activity | — | October 17, 2026 | October 15, 2026 |
| Install complexity | — | Easy; API and CLI knowledge required | سهل للتثبيت؛ يحتاج معرفة Git / Easy to install; Git knowledge required |
| Category | Testing, Git, DevOps | Testing, DevOps | Code Review, Git |
| Best use | Best for a developer or small team that repeatedly edits GitHub Actions workflows and wants to test a job before pushing. It provides a local run log, while a final GitHub check remains necessary. It is not suitable when exact hosted-runner parity is required. | Best for a developer or small team that wants repeatable API checks with explicit conditions stored beside the code. It links request data and identifies failing assertions without repeating manual inspection. It does not replace browser tests or test-environment setup; curl may be enough for a one-off request. | Best for a solo developer or small team that works from the terminal and wants focused, reviewable commits. It helps select changes and open another branch in a separate working folder. It does not replace tests or Git knowledge; your editor interface may already be enough. |