# Clawboo vs Muse Code (slim)

> Clawboo and Muse Code score within a point of each other for multi-agent orchestration, 61.4 and 61.2 out of 100. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/clawboo-vs-muse-code.md (~4,700 tokens) · this version ~1,630 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/clawboo-vs-muse-code.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/clawboo-vs-muse-code
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-01
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Clawboo and Muse Code score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61.4 (C) and 61.2 (C). Muse Code leads on maintenance & community. Both do multi-agent orchestration.

- Clawboo: C 61.4, rank #555 of 1251 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/clawboo.min.md
- Muse Code: C 61.2, rank #560 of 1251 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/muse-code.min.md
- Clawboo, good for One person on one computer who wants several coding and general agents on one board, with shared memory and a lead agent that routes work. Ahead on Reliability, 52 against 45; Payments & pricing, 60 against 20. Also No key needed to call it; Free to start without a card; Open source.
- Muse Code, good for Developers who want Meta's Muse models, Muse Wonder Full included, in a terminal or CI agent with the sandbox and approvals on from the first run. Ahead on Maintenance & community, 75 against 51. Also No incidents deducted, where Clawboo loses 4 points for them.

| Category | Clawboo | Muse Code |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 52 | 45 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 83 | 84 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 75 | 79 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 70 | 67 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 60 | 20 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 51 | 75 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 58 | 56 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Clawboo | Muse Code |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Sanreds | Meta |
| Auth | None | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Free | Paid |
| Licence | MIT | Proprietary binary, used under the Meta Model API Terms of Service, which cover Meta's coding harness. Subscriptions are also under the Meta Subscription Terms of Service. The TypeScript and Python SDKs in the linked repository are MIT. |
| Read-only variant documented | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-21 | 2026-10-11 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 2026-10-02 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | couldn't be read |
| Customer content may train models | not read yet | yes |
| Terms restrict automated access | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not read yet | yes |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not read yet | yes |
| Popularity | 100 npm/wk | 63k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | none | 3.3/5 (4) |

Why the edge:
- Payments & pricing, Clawboo +40: Clawboo 60 (No payment protocol (0). Read with the self-hosted rule. Free under MIT with nothing to buy (20). No card and no Clawboo account (20). One `npx` command installs and starts it with no sign-up (20). Model costs belong to the providers the owner connects.); Muse Code 20 (Harness reading of the published rubric. No payment protocol (0). Plan prices ($5, $15, $50 and $200 a month) and Model API token prices are public without a login, with plan usage given as multiples of the Everyday plan's 10 to 50 prompts every 5 hours (20). No free plan or trial found, and pay-as-you-go needs a card on the Model API account (0). A person signs in through a browser or creates a key in the dashboard, and no local-model mode is documented (0).)
- Maintenance & community, Muse Code +24: Clawboo 51 (0.5.0 was published to npm on 21 October 2026 (30). Two releases in the 90 days to 1 November 2026, 0.4.0 on 28 September and 0.5.0, below the three the line asks for (0). github.com was unreachable, so replies to issues, pull requests and Discussions are unchecked. The CI file cites issue #140 as fixed (3). One public npm package, current, with no entry in the official MCP registry for its four servers (10). CI, CodeQL, weekly Dependabot and SLSA provenance on 0.4.0 and 0.5.0, with `@composio/client` pinned to an alpha (8).); Muse Code 75 (1.4.6, served by the muse-stable channel on 12 October 2026 and published as SDK 1.4.6 on 11 October (30). The SDK, released in step, published 1.3.0 on 18 September, 1.4.2 on 30 September, 1.4.4 on 8 October and 1.4.6 on 11 October (20). No public tracker for the CLI. The SDK repository takes issues with a written triage guide, and the help centre takes support tickets, neither tested (8 of 25). MIT TypeScript and Python SDKs at 1.4.6, labelled a developer preview (12 of 15). A checksummed launcher and release manifest, but no public CI for the program (5 of 10).)
- Reliability, Clawboo +7: Clawboo 52 (Read as local software. The official npm package `clawboo` states Node.js 22.12 or newer, and the README says macOS, Linux and Windows are supported (20). `ci.yml` runs lint, typecheck, Vitest and a real-concurrency suite on Linux and platform suites on Windows and macOS, and `publish.yml` reruns build, lint, typecheck, tests and a clean-install boot before it publishes. 0.5.0 carries provenance from that workflow on main, so its checks passed at that commit, but run results on main couldn't be read (15). github.com was unreachable, so open crash and regression issues are unchecked. A known-issues page lists 25 entries with a status each, three of them fixed on main (5). Changesets write a changelog entry per release, and removals and the 0.2.0 database reset are called out, though breaking changes arrive in minor versions before 1.0 (12). Version 0.5.0, and SECURITY.md says pre-1.0 (0).); Muse Code 45 (Local-package reading. Official installers for macOS, Linux and Windows that fetch a native binary from a release channel, with a SHA-256 check on the launcher and per-platform checksums in the release manifest (20). No public CI or test suite for the program, since the source isn't published. The SDK repository's workflows only publish to npm and PyPI (0). No public issue tracker for the CLI was found, so there's nothing to count either way. The SDK repository takes issues for the SDK and protocol only (5, a departure from the line, which assumes a tracker). Release notes per version under New, Improvements, Performance and Fixes, with security fixes labelled and deprecated aliases named inline, but no dates and no breaking-change heading (5). 1.4.6 (15). Same reading as Claude Code, which is also closed source.)