Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Ruff | Miller | Lychee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal, GitHub | Universal, MCP, Claude Code, Codex, Cursor | Universal |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT | BSD-2-Clause | MIT OR Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 50435 | 10055 | 4093 |
| Last activity | November 5, 2026 | October 21, 2026 | October 26, 2026 |
| Install complexity | EASY | EASY | — |
| Category | Code Review, Testing | Workflow, Data | Testing, Workflow |
| 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. | Ideal for developers, data analysts, and operators who need to clean a CSV export, inspect JSON Lines, or summarize a large file from the terminal without starting a Python project. Use it for quick, repeatable file processing; concurrent transactions and advanced visual analysis still call for a database or complementary analytics tool. | 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. |