Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Lychee | Hurl | MarkItDown |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal | Universal | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT OR Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Stars | 4057 | 19282 | 192643 |
| Last activity | October 26, 2026 | October 17, 2026 | — |
| Install complexity | — | Easy; API and CLI knowledge required | سهل / Easy |
| Category | Testing, Workflow | Testing, DevOps | Workflow, Research |
| Best use | For documentation authors and small teams checking references locally or in CI. Start with a specific file and interpret findings; it does not establish complete site or login functionality. | 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. |