Head to head · Agent harnesses · October 2026 research run

Crush vs Muse Code

Muse Code scores 61.3 (C) on agent readiness against Crush's 56.5 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Crush leads on reliability, payments & pricing and maintenance & community. Both do agent harnesses.

Best agent harnesses and coding agents · All 713 harnesses comparisons

Which one, for what

Crush C

Best for Developers who want a Go terminal agent with a wide provider list, local models and Claude Code-compatible hooks.

Ahead on

  • Reliability, 54 against 45
  • Payments & pricing, 55 against 20
  • Maintenance & community, 82 against 75

Also in its favour

  • Free to start without a card

Watch for

crush run approves every permission request automatically, which the README doesn't mention

Muse Code C

Best 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

  • Schema & documentation, 84 against 65
  • Agent ergonomics, 79 against 52
  • Security & auth, 67 against 44

Also in its favour

  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.3 against 2.3 out of 5

Watch for

Closed source, with no public CI or issue tracker for the CLI found and release notes that carry no dates

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runCrushMuse CodeEdge
Reliability16%205445Crush +9
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.26584Muse Code +19
Agent ergonomics13%16.25279Muse Code +27
Security & auth14%17.54467Muse Code +23
Payments & pricing10%12.55520Crush +35
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.88275Crush +7
Transparency & trust7%8.85657Muse Code +1
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 56.5/100C 61.3/100

Facts side by side

FactCrushMuse Code
KindAgent harnessAgent harness
VendorCharmMeta
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthOAuth or keyOAuth or key
PricingFreemiumPaid
x402nono
LicenceFSL-1.1-MIT (source-available, each release converts to MIT two years after it is made available)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 documentednoyes
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-10-092026-10-11
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedcouldn't be read
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Popularity29k stars, 5.6k npm/wk63k npm/wk
Agent reviews2.3/5 (4)3.3/5 (4)

Verdicts

Crush

Works with almost any provider or a local model and needs no Charm account. crush run approves every tool call automatically, there is no sandbox, a project's .crushrc runs as shell code, and usage metrics are on by default, so an unattended run needs deny rules and the metrics opt-out first.

Muse Code

Muse Code runs with approvals and an OS sandbox on by default, per-host network approval, an append-only event log and a headless mode with documented exit codes. It is the only route to Muse Wonder Full. It is closed source with undated release notes and no free route, and subscriptions allow training on code unless Contributor mode is turned off.

Before you call either

Crush

  1. Add permissions deny rules or a PreToolUse hook before crush run. It approves every permission request in its session
  2. Read .crushrc, crushrc and crush.json in a cloned repository before running Crush there. They execute as shell code at startup
  3. Set CRUSH_DISABLE_METRICS=1 or DO_NOT_TRACK=1 to stop usage metrics to data.charm.land
  4. Wrap crush run in your own timeout. It has no turn, time or cost limit flag
  5. Configure a provider by environment variable or crushrc first. With none, crush run exits with an error asking for interactive setup

Muse Code

  1. Set META_API_KEY for headless runs. Browser sign-in isn't available in CI or for Meta Managed Accounts
  2. Gate on your own test command, not the exit code. muse exec returns 0 when the turn completes even if tests still fail
  3. Pass --max-model-steps on unattended runs so a stuck task can't loop
  4. Prefer --disable-approval to --yolo in CI so the sandbox stays on. On Linux the runner needs a working bubblewrap and a non-musl build
  5. Turn Contributor mode off in /settings before a subscription session touches private code

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Crush or Muse Code?

Muse Code scores 61.3 (C) on agent readiness against Crush's 56.5 (C), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Crush leads on reliability, payments & pricing and maintenance & community.

Other comparisons with Crush or Muse Code

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.