Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Dagu | act | goose |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal, MCP | GitHub | Universal, MCP |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 4491 | 72477 | 55907 |
| Last activity | October 28, 2026 | — | October 23, 2026 |
| Install complexity | سهل للبداية؛ يحتاج ضبط أمان قبل المشاركة / Easy to start; security configuration required before sharing | — | MEDIUM |
| Category | Workflow, DevOps, Monitoring | Testing, Git, DevOps | Code Review, Multi-Agent, Workflow |
| Best use | Best for a developer or small team with connected scripts that need schedules, history, and a clear failure point. It adds dependencies, retries, and an operations UI without an external database in single-server mode. A simple independent command may not need it, and some team controls such as additional users, SSO, RBAC, and audit logging currently require a paid license. | 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 an individual developer or small team that wants an AI agent to complete an inspectable task in a working copy: understand files, make a bounded change, and run a test. Start with manual approval and scope the folder and tools. Do not give it broad access to production or sensitive data. |