Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Devstral Small 2 vs occamy-1.0

Devstral Small 2 and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on 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 6359 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Devstral Small 2 C

Best for Developers who want a dependable local coding agent on one consumer GPU or a 32 GB Mac

Ahead on

  • Risk, 60 against 55

Watch for

No limitations, safety results, languages or data on the card

occamy-1.0 C

Best for Agents that want an Apache 2.0 mixture-of-experts model tuned for long tool-using tasks on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or Mac.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 70 against 65
  • Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 46

Watch for

No safety results, prompt-injection guidance or security contact

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.

Documentation and upkeep occamy-1.0 +28

Devstral Small 2 46

Model card 11, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters and the context are on the card. Training data 0, Nothing on the card about the training data. Last change 10, the last commit, on 15 July 2026, updated the files to match mistral-common, 118 days before this check and within 180. Responsiveness 10, Of the 23 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (9 December 2025 to 6 November 2026), 11 have a reply from a mistralai member, which is some. Version policy 5, Devstral Small 1.1 stays in its own repository, which this card links as the predecessor, with no dated note on the older card that we read. File health 10, Config, template, tokenizer and card agree, and the June and July commits fixed stray tokens and brought the files in line with mistral-common. 11 + 0 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 10 = 46.

occamy-1.0 74

Model card 14 of 20, languages and a knowledge cut-off are missing. Training data 15, the mix by type with token counts, the method and a published subset, without a cut-off. Last change 20, Accio's GGUF build card changed on 19 October 2026 and the main card on 2 October. Responsiveness 10, Accio answered 4 of 9 questions. Version policy 5, a first release with no files replaced. File health 10, the files agree with the card. 14 + 15 + 20 + 10 + 5 + 10 = 74.

Risk Devstral Small 2 +5

Devstral Small 2 60

File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, files in Mistral's verified mistralai organisation, which Mistral's site links to per our Mistral Large 4 listing (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations or safety section, and nothing on prompt injection, instruction priority or what the model refuses. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 5, mistral.ai's security.txt gives a security contact and a submission policy, as read for the Mistral Large 4 listing (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.

occamy-1.0 55

File safety 25, safetensors only and nothing from the repository runs to load it or build prompts. Provenance 15, the files are in the organisation Accio's GitHub links, with MD5 sums and SHA-256 for every file. Safety evaluation 0, none published. Agent guidance 0. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0 that hasn't changed. Security programme 0, bug reports go to public GitHub issues and there's no security contact.

Agent interface occamy-1.0 +5

Devstral Small 2 65

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (11,362 characters), with the tokenizer's tekken file for mistral-common. Tool-calling format 25, the card documents tools in the OpenAI function format with an example, names the mistral tool-call parser with auto tool choice for vLLM, shows the same for SGLang, and ships test prompts with the expected tool-call output. Trained tool calling 10, the card says the model excels at using tools, and its tests cover one tool call and calls made one at a time in sequence. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained answers for this model. Reasoning control 0, no reasoning mode is documented, and a June 2026 commit removed stray thinking tokens from the files. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, served at 262,144 in its vLLM command. 20 + 25 + 10 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 65.

occamy-1.0 70

Chat template 20, the base's Jinja template in the repository. Tool-calling format 10 of 25, the card names the parser but the format lives only in the template. Trained tool calling 20, trained on tool use with several calls a turn. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking per request and the card says to keep the returned reasoning content. Context 10, 262,144 tokens.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDevstral Small 2occamy-1.0Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259090even
Risk20%206055Devstral Small 2 +5
Agent interface10%106570occamy-1.0 +5
Documentation and upkeep10%104674occamy-1.0 +28
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactDevstral Small 2occamy-1.0
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMistral AIAccio (Accio-Lab)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-152026-10-02
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone3/5 (4)

How the scores have moved

Verdicts

Devstral Small 2

The easy one to run: a 24B coding agent under Apache 2.0 that five runtimes carry, 15 GB at 4 bits in Ollama, with a 256K context, image input and well-documented tool calling. It's eleven months old, calls tools one at a time, has no reasoning mode, and its card says nothing on limits, safety or data.

occamy-1.0

A Qwen3.6-35B-A3B fine-tuned for long agent work with tools, files and code, under plain Apache 2.0, and Accio's 4-bit builds run in about 23 GB. The main gaps are no safety results, agent guidance or security contact, and every benchmark figure is Accio's own.

Before you call either

Devstral Small 2

  1. ollama run devstral-small-2 is the quickest start, at 15 GB
  2. On vLLM pass --tool-call-parser mistral --enable-auto-tool-choice
  3. Send the system prompt from CHAT_SYSTEM_PROMPT.txt in the repository. The card says results depend on it
  4. Use a low temperature. The repository's default is 0.15
  5. Plan for one tool call per turn
  6. The same model is on our Mistral API listing if you'd rather not host it

occamy-1.0

  1. Serve with --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder on vLLM 0.19.0 or SGLang 0.5.10 and later
  2. BF16 is 70.2 GB, so on a 128 GB machine run it without the card's 8-way tensor parallelism
  3. Keep the whole assistant message, reasoning and tool calls included, in later turns, as the card says
  4. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 20 and presence_penalty 1.5
  5. With the GGUFs, NFC-normalise input text and read TOKENIZER.md, since the files store qwen2 pre-tokenizer metadata
  6. The base's MTP layer isn't in this checkpoint, Accio-Lab/occamy-1.0-MTP is an experimental separate head
  7. Ollama has no Occamy library entry, so load Accio's GGUF in Ollama 0.40.14 or later, which builds a llama.cpp with the qwen35moe architecture

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Devstral Small 2 or occamy-1.0?

Devstral Small 2 and occamy-1.0 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). occamy-1.0 leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Devstral Small 2 or occamy-1.0

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.