Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Ruff | Lychee | Dagu |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal, GitHub | Universal | Universal, MCP |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | MIT OR Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Stars | 50435 | 4093 | 4547 |
| Last activity | November 5, 2026 | October 26, 2026 | October 28, 2026 |
| Install complexity | EASY | — | سهل للبداية؛ يحتاج ضبط أمان قبل المشاركة / Easy to start; security configuration required before sharing |
| Category | Code Review, Testing | Testing, Workflow | Workflow, DevOps, Monitoring |
| Best use | Best for an individual Python developer or small team that wants consistent linting, import organization, and formatting locally, in editors, and in CI. It adds reviewable rules, safe-by-default fixes, and a pinnable version. It does not replace tests, type checking, or business-logic review, and migration from Black or Flake8 should be tested on a branch. | 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 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. |