AIHawk vs OpenCLI

The two are close in size: 30.3k stars for AIHawk, 29.0k for OpenCLI.

OpenCLI leads on context depth and customization and privacy. AIHawk does not take any axis by a clear margin.

Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.

Where they stand today

Drives a real, patched Firefox browser over MCP or OpenRouter so the agent can click, type and read actual web pages for automation rather than relying on APIs or scraped data.

Stars
30.3k
Tracked growth
not tracked long enough
Maturity
Last commit
9h ago
Language
Python
License
MIT
Cost to run
Your OpenRouter API key or assistant-provided model

Converts any website into a deterministic CLI and lets AI agents drive your logged-in Chrome via a local Browser Bridge and reusable adapter skills.

Stars
29.0k
Tracked growth
+21.6%
Maturity
Last commit
5d ago
Language
JavaScript
License
Apache-2.0
Cost to run
Free, local runtime

Six axes, head to head

Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.

AxisAIHawkOpenCLI
Context depth
How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository.
No repo access
Site & related files
Noise control
How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only.
None mentioned
Basic diagnostics
Customization
How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config.
Config & flags
Plugins & adapters
Privacy
Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only.
Cloud API key
Runs locally
Model freedom
Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one.
OpenRouter / MCP
Multiple providers
Setup ease
What it takes to get a first useful run out of it.
Config + API key
Install + extension

Which one to pick

Pick AIHawk if…

Real browser automation — pick AIHawk when you need an agent that interacts with complex web pages (mouse, keyboard, real page rendering) and can integrate with your assistant or OpenRouter.

Runs in cli, web-app, ide. Works with byok, anthropic, gemini.

Pick OpenCLI if…

Local browser control — use your logged-in Chrome and a lightweight local daemon/extension so agents operate real pages and you can author reusable adapters and plugins.

  • Context depth: Site & related files (3/5 against 1/5)
  • Customization: Plugins & adapters (5/5 against 3/5)
  • Privacy: Runs locally (5/5 against 3/5)
Runs in cli, coding-agent-plugin. Works with anthropic, gemini, other-fixed.

What people want from each one

Questions people ask

Is AIHawk better than OpenCLI?

OpenCLI leads on context depth and customization and privacy. AIHawk does not take any axis by a clear margin. AIHawk is worth picking when real browser automation — pick AIHawk when you need an agent that interacts with complex web pages (mouse, keyboard, real page rendering) and can integrate with your assistant or OpenRouter.

Which of AIHawk and OpenCLI keeps my code private?

AIHawk: Cloud API key (3/5). OpenCLI: Runs locally (5/5).

What does each one cost to run?

AIHawk: Your OpenRouter API key or assistant-provided model. OpenCLI: Free, local runtime.

Full profiles: feder-cr/AIHawk and jackwener/OpenCLI. Everything else in Browser agents.