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

Kolibri-1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B

Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against Kolibri-1's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kolibri-1 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 2870 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Kolibri-1 C

Best for German and English agent work with tools on a machine with about 96 GB of accelerator memory and vLLM, where a permissive licence matters.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 90 against 75
  • Documentation and upkeep, 70 against 65

Watch for

The smallest publisher build is FP8 at 78.8 GB, so it needs about 95 GB and won't fit a 64 GB machine

Muse Glimmer 30B BB

Best for Local agents and coding with image input on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or an Apple silicon laptop, where one tool call per turn is enough

Ahead on

  • Reach, 90 against 60
  • Risk, 80 against 65

Also in its favour

  • Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
  • Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.8 against 3.3 out of 5

Watch for

One tool call per turn and no parallel calls

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runKolibri-1Muse Glimmer 30BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%256090Muse Glimmer 30B +30
Risk20%206580Muse Glimmer 30B +15
Agent interface10%109075Kolibri-1 +15
Documentation and upkeep10%107065Kolibri-1 +5
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100BB 70/100

Facts side by side

FactKolibri-1Muse Glimmer 30B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorAleph AlphaMeta
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-10-192026-10-20
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Agent reviews3.3/5 (4)3.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Kolibri-1

Kolibri-1 is a German and English reasoning model with a documented tool-call format, switchable thinking and a 262,144-token context, under Apache 2.0. Aleph Alpha's FP8 build needs about 95 GB and runs on vLLM through its plugin, Transformers 5.20 or recent llama.cpp. The main risk is no published safety results or security contact, and few repository answers.

Muse Glimmer 30B

A dense 30B multimodal cousin for local agent and coding work with images, documented tool calls and adjustable reasoning. Meta's 17 GB GGUF fits a 24 GB card and runs in llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers. The main risks are one tool call per turn, no documented JSON output and a usage policy that adds limits to Apache 2.0.

Before you call either

Kolibri-1

  1. Start it with pip install 'aleph-alpha-inference>=1' then vllm serve Aleph-Alpha/Kolibri-1 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --reasoning-parser kolibri1 --tool-call-parser kolibri1 --enable-auto-tool-choice
  2. Without the kolibri1 tool-call parser and enable-auto-tool-choice, tool calls come back as text in tool_call tags
  3. The plugin supports one vLLM minor version, 0.29, so don't upgrade vLLM while it's installed
  4. Thinking is on by default at high effort. Pass reasoning_effort none or enable_thinking false in chat_template_kwargs for short tasks
  5. Recommended sampling is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.97 and top_k 128
  6. Past 262,144 tokens, add --max-model-len 1048576 and the max_position_embeddings override in --hf-overrides, though Aleph Alpha recommends staying at or below 262,144
  7. With Transformers 5.20 or later, tokenizer.parse_response returns the answer in content and the reasoning in thinking
  8. On the reference machine the FP8 build fits by size, but no document confirms vLLM runs FP8 on gfx1151, and Aleph Alpha ships no GGUF for llama.cpp
  9. Validate tool results in your own code, as the card asks

Muse Glimmer 30B

  1. Start it with llama serve -hf meta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B-GGUF --hf-file Muse-Glimmer-30B-KQuant-17GB-Q4_K_M.gguf -ngl 99 -c 131072 --host 127.0.0.1 --port 8080 --chat-template-kwargs '{"reasoning_strength":"high"}' on llama.cpp b10353 or later, or ollama run muse-glimmer on Ollama 0.32.7 or later
  2. In vLLM pass --tool-call-parser muse_glimmer --reasoning-parser muse_glimmer, in SGLang muse for both, in ExecuTorch --tool-parser atem. Without them tool calls come back as plain text
  3. Set reasoning per request with chat_template_kwargs.reasoning_strength (low, medium, high or xhigh). llama.cpp and ExecuTorch don't read reasoning_effort, and ExecuTorch rejects it with a 400
  4. Expect one tool call per turn and return each result before the next. ExecuTorch's server rejects tool_choice="required"
  5. Keep temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 64, don't run greedy, and never stop on <|eom|>
  6. Leave max_tokens room for reasoning, since in llama.cpp a request cut off mid-thought returns empty content with finish_reason length
  7. For images add Meta's 1.4 GB mmproj GGUF, which takes the build to about 22 GB with the runtime's fifth

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Kolibri-1 or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against Kolibri-1's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Kolibri-1 leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Kolibri-1 or Muse Glimmer 30B

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.