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

Kimi K3 vs OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT

Kimi K3 scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT's 56.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT leads on 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

Kimi K3 B

Best for Teams with a multi-node GPU cluster who want an open 1M-context agent model for long coding and research work

Ahead on

  • Risk, 65 against 55
  • Agent interface, 65 against 60

Watch for

1,561 GB of files at its smallest publisher build, far beyond any single machine

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT C

Best for Telecoms teams that want an open model for standards questions and RAG on their own hardware

Ahead on

  • Documentation and upkeep, 74 against 41

Watch for

BF16 only at 62.6 GB, with no GGUF or other quantised build from anyone we checked

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 OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +33

Kimi K3 41

The model card earns 11, covering intended use, architecture, parameters and context, but not limitations, languages or a knowledge cut-off. Training data earns 5 for a general description with no cut-off. The last change earns 15, an encoding_k3.py update on 20 August, 74 days before 2 November and within 90; the GitHub repository's last commit is 6 August. Responsiveness earns nothing, with no Moonshot reply in the 40 most recent discussions. Version policy earns 5 for a first release. File health earns 5, because a report that the tokeniser goes past the declared vocabulary waits without a reply.

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 74

Model card 14, Intended use, a long limitations section, the architecture and training method, the parameters (31B) and the language (English) are on the card. Training data 15, the card names the sources (3GPP, ETSI, ITU, GSMA, CAMARA, O-RAN and TM Forum material provided by GSMA), the overall sizes (15 billion raw tokens, over 1 trillion processed, about 440 billion used), the mix of example types and the processing tool, and lists what was left out. Last change 20, the last commit, on 1 November 2026, updated the card's links, resources, citation and contacts, nine days before this check. Responsiveness 20, Of the 3 discussions that aren't pull requests (7 August to 28 October 2026), 2 have a reply from the repository's owner, which is most. Version policy 0, the weights were replaced in place: uploads on 27 July, 3 August and 1 September 2026 under one name, with a standing notice on the card that they may change and that users should pin a revision, and no dated note of what changed. File health 5, the card describes 15 shards of about 62.6 GB while the repository still holds an earlier 14-shard set beside them, 126.8 GB in all. 14 + 15 + 20 + 20 + 0 + 5 = 74.

Risk Kimi K3 +10

Kimi K3 65

File safety earns 15, safetensors only with no pickle files, less 10 because the documented loading path runs Moonshot's Python with trust_remote_code and builds prompts with encoding_k3.py. Provenance earns the full 15, files in the organisation Moonshot links to with a SHA-256 for every shard. Safety evaluation earns 20 for the cyber assessment the UK AI Security Institute and CAISI ran and published, which found its safeguards didn't stop exploit development. Agent guidance earns 5 for the blog's general cautions about proactiveness and passing back thinking. Licence risk earns 10, losing 5 for the model-as-a-service revenue threshold and nothing else. The security programme earns nothing, with no security.txt, disclosure policy, SECURITY.md or public advisories found.

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 55

File safety 25, safetensors only, with no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python files. Provenance 5, the files sit in a personal account, farbodtavakkoli, not in an organisation AT&T's or GSMA's site links to: GSMA's article names AT&T as the releaser without linking the repository, and the GitHub repository that links it is the same person's (0). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 10, the card says what the trained abstention covers (declining when context is missing, irrelevant or insufficient) and what to add around the model for agent use: an external tool runtime, validated tool schemas, permission controls, audit logging, safeguards and human review. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, field-of-use limit, threshold or change clause, nothing is added on the card, and the licence link resolves (200 on 10 November 2026). Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 25 + 5 + 0 + 10 + 15 + 0 = 55.

Agent interface Kimi K3 +5

Kimi K3 65

The chat template earns 10, because there is no Jinja template and the prompt format exists only as encoding_k3.py, code you run. The tool-calling format earns 10, since Moonshot documents the tools channel but the parser name comes only from vLLM's and SGLang's own recipes. Trained tool calling earns 20 for indexed parallel calls in one turn. Structured output earns 5, as the card names it among its linked guides without saying how to ask the weights for it, and the how sits in hosted-API docs. Reasoning control earns 10, with per-request effort documented on the card and reasoning returned as reasoning_content. Context earns 10 for 1,048,576 tokens trained in.

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT 60

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository, 19,300 characters, the publisher's own. Tool-calling format 10, only the template says how tools are declared and how calls come back. Trained tool calling 20, the template loops over tool_calls, so it renders several calls in one turn, and the card says the training mix included general-purpose agentic tool-calling examples, while none were specific to telecoms. Structured output 0, the card doesn't document JSON or JSON Schema output. Reasoning control 0, the card says the model wasn't trained to produce or consume Gemma's thought channel and answers directly, so there is no thinking to switch or budget. Context 10, 262,144 positions in the text config, the base's native context. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runKimi K3OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-ITEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255050even
Risk20%206555Kimi K3 +10
Agent interface10%106560Kimi K3 +5
Documentation and upkeep10%104174OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT +33
Negative events≤1500
TotalB 62.4/100C 56.8/100

Facts side by side

FactKimi K3OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMoonshot AIAT&T (Open Telco AI)
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceKimi K3 License (modified MIT)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-09-022026-11-01
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviews2.3/5 (4)none

Verdicts

Kimi K3

Kimi K3 is a 2.8T multimodal agent model with a 1M-token context, parallel tool calls and per-request effort, for long coding and research sessions. Its 1,561 GB of files need a multi-node GPU cluster, so most agents will call a hosted copy. The main risks are Moonshot's Python running at load and prompt time, and no answers in its repository.

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT

A real telecoms post-training of Gemma 4 31B IT with an unusually candid card on what was and wasn't trained. It fits a 128 GB machine in BF16 only, with no quantised build, sits in a personal account, and its weights have been replaced in place. Tool-call format, structured output and safety results aren't documented.

Before you call either

Kimi K3

  1. Start it with SGLang on a node of 8 B300s, sglang serve --trust-remote-code --model-path moonshotai/Kimi-K3 --tp-size 8 --context-length 65536 --mem-fraction-static 0.82 --reasoning-parser kimi_k3 --tool-call-parser kimi_k3 --port 30000
  2. Use the kimi_k3 tool-call and reasoning parsers in vLLM or SGLang, and validate tool-call arguments against the schema, since vLLM's recipe says K3 sometimes emits a format its parser doesn't expect
  3. Pass the whole assistant message back every turn, reasoning_content and tool_calls included, or output becomes unstable
  4. Thinking is always on; set reasoning_effort to low or high when max is too slow
  5. Sampling per the card is temperature 1.0, with top-p 0.95 for single-step tasks and 1.0 for agentic ones
  6. Don't hand an ongoing session from another model to K3, and state boundaries in the system prompt, since Moonshot warns it can act on its own when intent is unclear
  7. Without the hardware, call it through Moonshot's API or an inference provider listed on its Hugging Face page

OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT

  1. Download the 15 shards the index names, not the whole repository, which is twice the size
  2. Pin a revision. The card says the weights may change under the same name
  3. Serve it with vLLM 0.19.0 or later and the repository's own chat template, not Gemma 4's
  4. Send no thinking flags. It answers directly and wasn't trained on Gemma's thought channel
  5. Use it as the generation stage of a RAG pipeline over telecom standards, with source attribution and human review
  6. Don't use it to run network tools unattended. The card says that hasn't been evaluated

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Kimi K3 or OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT?

Kimi K3 scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT's 56.8 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT leads on documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Kimi K3 or OTel-2.0-LLM-31B-IT

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.