Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Dagu | Hurl | MarkItDown |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal, MCP | Universal | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Stars | 4491 | 19287 | 192849 |
| Last activity | October 28, 2026 | October 17, 2026 | — |
| Install complexity | سهل للبداية؛ يحتاج ضبط أمان قبل المشاركة / Easy to start; security configuration required before sharing | Easy; API and CLI knowledge required | سهل / Easy |
| Category | Workflow, DevOps, Monitoring | Testing, DevOps | Workflow, Research |
| 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 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 developer or analyst extracting text from several document formats before search or supplying selected passages to an AI agent. It provides a repeatable CLI command and Python library, while requiring review against the original. It is not intended for layout-perfect document publishing. |