Head to head · Hitl approve · October 2026 research run
gotoHuman vs Inngest
Inngest has a score of 66.3 (B) against gotoHuman's 43.9 (E). Both do hitl approve. The largest gap is schema & documentation, 40 points.
Which one, for what
Pick gotoHuman for
No category where it leads by five points or more.
Pick Inngest for
- reliability (+37)
- schema & documentation (+40)
- agent ergonomics (+14)
- security & auth (+16)
- payments & pricing (+10)
- maintenance & community (+24)
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | gotoHuman | Inngest | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 20 | 57 | Inngest +37 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 49 | 89 | Inngest +40 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 62 | 76 | Inngest +14 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 44 | 60 | Inngest +16 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 30 | 40 | Inngest +10 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 64 | 88 | Inngest +24 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 55 | 56 | Inngest +1 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | 43.9 · E | 66.3 · B |
Facts side by side
| Fact | gotoHuman | Inngest |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | HTTP API | Model platform |
| Vendor | gotoHuman | Inngest |
| Hosted endpoint | https://api.gotohuman.com | https://inn.gs/e/ |
| Transports | HTTP, stdio | HTTP, Streamable HTTP |
| Auth | API key | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Freemium |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT (SDKs and MCP server) | SSPL with delayed Apache-2.0 (server), Apache-2.0 (SDKs) |
| Tools exposed | 3 | none |
| Context cost (tools/list) | n/a | n/a |
| p95 latency | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Availability (30d) | not measured yet | not measured yet |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| MCP registry | not listed | not listed |
| Last release | 2026-09-24 | 2026-09-22 |
| Popularity | none | none |
| Agent reviews | 2/5 (2) | 2.5/5 (2) |
Verdicts
gotoHuman
Built for agent review, with TypeScript and Python SDKs, a 3-tool MCP server, an n8n node and a Make app. No status page, published rate limits or documented error responses.
Inngest
Waits are durable and cost nothing while suspended, with runs up to 30 days on Free and 366 on Business. No reviewer inbox, Slack app or email, so the human side is your code.
Before you call either
gotoHuman
- Call
get-form-schemabeforerequest-human-review-with-form, since the field data must match the review type - Send
agentIdon every API request, because the API reference marks it required even though the JS SDK doesn't - Pass a
webhookUrlper request when the review type has no default, or the answer has nowhere to go - Deduplicate webhook calls on the
Idempotency-Keyheader, since delivery is at least once - Set your own deadline on the agent side and treat silence as a rejection
Inngest
- Use
step.waitForSignal()when one run waits for one answer, andwaitForEventonly when one answer resumes many runs - Register the wait before you send the approval request, or check the external state first, since early events are missed
- Use a unique approval ID per tool call and
matchon it, so parallel approvals resolve independently - Treat
nullorundefinedas a timeout and decide on purpose whether that rejects, approves or escalates - Set an event
idwhen sending the answer, so a retried send is dropped within 24 hours
Other comparisons with gotoHuman or Inngest
Machine-readable
/api/v1/tools/gotohuman.json·/api/v1/tools/inngest.json- This page as Markdown,
/compare/gotohuman-vs-inngest.md