Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-VL-2B
Darwin-36B-Opus and LFM3-VL-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). LFM3-VL-2B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Reasoning-heavy text tasks on a 32 GB machine or a single 80 GB GPU, where a disclosed training method isn't required
Ahead on
- Risk, 55 against 40
Watch for
The merge method is proprietary and the current weights include an undescribed targeted refinement
Best for Agents on a laptop, phone or robot that need to read screens, documents, images and video from a model under 2 GB at 4 bits
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 80
- Agent interface, 90 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 77 against 61
Watch for
vLLM and SGLang support is unreleased, which the card says itself
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Agent interface LFM3-VL-2B +20
Darwin-36B-Opus 70
Chat template 20, Qwen3.6's Jinja template in the repository. Tool-calling format 10, the format is only in the template and the card says nothing about tools. Trained tool calling 20, inherited from the base that was trained for it, with several calls in one turn in the template, though the publisher neither claims nor tests it. Structured output 0. Reasoning control 10, the template turns thinking off per request and the card shows where the reasoning comes back. Context 10, 262,144 tokens.
LFM3-VL-2B 90
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (12,129 characters), with roles, images and video, tools, deferred tools, tool results and the thinking switch. Tool-calling format 25, the card and Liquid's tool-use page document tools passed through tools= in apply_chat_template, calls returned as XML and results sent back as tool messages. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over every entry in an assistant turn's tool_calls, so several calls fit in one turn, and the card says its fine-tuning mix included tool calling and agentic traces. Structured output 5, the card's vLLM and SGLang commands set a structured-output backend and its fine-tuning table has a JSON extraction notebook, but nothing says how to ask this model for JSON. Liquid's API guide documents response_format with lfm3-1.7b as its example. Reasoning control 10, Liquid's chat-template page documents enable_thinking=False in apply_chat_template for LFM3, with reasoning on by default inside think tags, and the card documents preserve_thinking and reports a no-thinking configuration in its benchmarks. Context 10, 128K tokens of input and output per the card, and max_position_embeddings 128000 for the language model in config.json. 20 + 25 + 20 + 5 + 10 + 10 = 90.
Documentation and upkeep LFM3-VL-2B +16
Darwin-36B-Opus 61
Model card 11, it covers architecture, parameters, context and languages but not intended use, limitations or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, the reasoning parent's fine-tune is described without datasets or a cut-off. Last change 20, on 1 November 2026 the publisher added a LICENSE file and a corrected eval_results note to the main repository and edited the POCKET-35B-GGUF card, read as this run reads card edits on other open-weight listings (Muse Glimmer 30B, MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B, Apertus v1.5 8B). The weights date from 23 April and the GGUF build from 22 July. Responsiveness 20, the publisher answered 8 of the 13 discussions, and two of the rest are its own posts. Version policy 5, a first release whose weights were replaced twice in its first day with commit titles but no card note. File health 0, the card's head counts and base still disagree with the files, and the generation config drops the base's end-of-turn stop token. 11 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 0 = 61.
LFM3-VL-2B 77
Model card 17, Intended use (questions about video, documents, charts and app screens, finding objects, spatial reasoning), a limitation (not recommended for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning), architecture (language model, 14-layer vision encoder and projector), parameters (1.92B), context (128K) and 16 languages. Training data 5, A general description: the base's 22T tokens of pre-training with the kinds of data added since LFM2, then vision mid-training on image and video data, supervised fine-tuning, vision reinforcement learning and distillation. Last change 20, the last commit, on 9 November 2026, added the OpenVINO checkpoint to the card's inference table, a day before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 5 discussions that aren't pull requests (27 to 31 October 2026), 3 have a reply from a LiquidAI member, which is most. Version policy 5, LFM3 came out in new repositories and the LFM2.5 models stay in theirs. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the lfm3_vl architecture, the 128,000-token context and the vision settings in processor_config.json. 17 + 5 + 20 + 20 + 5 + 10 = 77.
Risk Darwin-36B-Opus +15
Darwin-36B-Opus 55
File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only with no code in the repository, so the card's trust_remote_code flag loads nothing extra. Provenance 15, the files are in the FINAL-Bench organisation that vidraft.net links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 through the whole chain with no conditions added. Security programme 0, no security.txt, policy or contact.
LFM3-VL-2B 40
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25). Provenance 15, files in the LiquidAI organisation, which Liquid's docs page for the model and its blog post link to (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card or in Liquid's blog post for the LFM3 family, neither of which mentions safety testing. Agent guidance 0, Nothing on prompt injection, an instruction hierarchy, what refusals cover or safeguards to add. Licence risk 10, 15 less 5 for the $10M annual revenue threshold on commercial use. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 10 + 0 = 40.
Reach LFM3-VL-2B +5
Darwin-36B-Opus 80
Memory 20, the publisher's Q4_K_M GGUF is 21.2 GB and needs about 25.4 GB with the fifth added, so 32 GB. Runtimes 20, the text-only Qwen3.5 MoE class runs in released vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp, while Ollama's and LM Studio's entries are the base's, not this model's. Builds 15, FINAL-Bench's POCKET-35B-GGUF has it at four precisions. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added, with a LICENSE file since 1 November 2026, and Apache 2.0 on the base Qwen3.6-35B-A3B too. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 0, no provider or API serves it.
LFM3-VL-2B 85
Memory 30, Liquid's Q4_K_M GGUF is 1.10 GB with its 0.20 GB projector file, and 1.30 GB × 1.2 = 1.6 GB, which fits 8 GB, well inside the 16 GB line. Runtimes 15, Released llama.cpp has the lfm3 architecture and the LFM3-VL projector (src/models/lfm3.cpp and tools/mtmd at b12242), Ollama's library has an lfm3-vl entry, and LM Studio's catalogue lists liquid/lfm3-vl-2b. Builds 15, Liquid's GGUF repository holds Q4_0, Q4_K_M, Q8_0, F16 and BF16 files, and Liquid publishes 4-bit and 8-bit MLX builds and an ONNX repository, all in the LiquidAI organisation. Terms 10, the LFM Open License v1.0, a custom licence that lets anyone use it commercially for free below a threshold of $10M annual revenue. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false for the model and its GGUF, MLX and ONNX repositories on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Liquid's own API lists lfm3-vl-2b among its models, so the publisher hosts it. 30 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 10 + 5 = 85.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Darwin-36B-Opus | LFM3-VL-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 80 | 85 | LFM3-VL-2B +5 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 55 | 40 | Darwin-36B-Opus +15 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 90 | LFM3-VL-2B +20 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 61 | 77 | LFM3-VL-2B +16 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Darwin-36B-Opus | LFM3-VL-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | FINAL-Bench (VIDRAFT) | Liquid AI |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | LFM Open License v1.0 (free commercial use below $10M annual revenue) |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-04-23 | 2026-11-09 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.5/5 (4) | none |
How the scores have moved
LFM3-VL-2B
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
Darwin-36B-Opus
A text-only reasoning cousin merged from Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and a reasoning-distilled fine-tune of it, with about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for the publisher's 4-bit GGUF or about 83 GB in BF16, and runs in vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp. The main risks are an undisclosed merge method, a card that disagrees with its files, and no safety results.
LFM3-VL-2B
A 1.92B vision model that reads images and video on an 8 GB machine, with a documented tool-call format and thinking. It runs today in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio, while vLLM and SGLang support is still unreleased. Transformers needs repository code, and there are no safety results, security contact or data sources.
Before you call either
Darwin-36B-Opus
- Quickest start is
llama-server -hf FINAL-Bench/POCKET-35B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, about 21 GB of files - On the reference machine BF16 fits,
vllm serve FINAL-Bench/Darwin-36B-Opus --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, the parsers for Qwen3.6's format - Thinking is on by default, send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - The card suggests temperature 0.6 to 0.7 and at least 5,120 new tokens for its think traces
- generation_config.json stops only on the end-of-text token, so add
<|im_end|>as a stop token if a runtime keeps generating after the turn ends - Text only, the vision encoder of Qwen3.6-35B-A3B isn't in these files
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
LFM3-VL-2B
- Start it with
llama-server -hf LiquidAI/LFM3-VL-2B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinjaorollama run lfm3-vl, with llama.cpp b11960 or later - Use temperature 0.1, top_k 50 and repetition penalty 1.1, per the card
- Video is sampled at 2 frames a second up to 768 frames, and each frame costs context. Video input in llama.cpp needs ffmpeg
- Don't plan on vLLM or SGLang until a release carries LFM3-VL
- Validate JSON output yourself
- Liquid doesn't recommend it for coding, multi-turn conversations or complex reasoning
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Darwin-36B-Opus or LFM3-VL-2B?
Darwin-36B-Opus and LFM3-VL-2B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). LFM3-VL-2B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Darwin-36B-Opus or LFM3-VL-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Agents-A1-4B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Arete-27B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Arete-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- BigBang-v1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Carbon-X vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Carbon-X vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs gpt-oss-120b
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs gpt-oss-20b
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Hy3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Inkling
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Inkling-Small
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kimi K3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kolibri-1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Kronos
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna M.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna S 2.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-1.7B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Mistral Large 4
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs occamy-1.0
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs SmolLM3-3B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LFM3-VL-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Hy3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling-Small vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Inkling vs LFM3-VL-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kimi K3 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Kronos vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LBS-27B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LFM3-VL-2B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Mistral Large 4
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs occamy-1.0
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Recursive Flint
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- LFM3-VL-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LFM3-VL-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/darwin-36b-opus-vs-lfm3-vl-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/darwin-36b-opus.json·/api/v1/tools/lfm3-vl-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare darwin-36b-opus lfm3-vl-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "darwin-36b-opus", "b": "lfm3-vl-2b"}at/mcp, no key