claude-context vs Graft

claude-context is much bigger: 12.5k stars against 5.6k.

Graft leads on privacy and setup ease. claude-context 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

An MCP plugin that gives Claude Code whole-repo semantic code search via hybrid BM25 + dense vector retrieval backed by Milvus, reducing tokens compared with loading large directories into the model.

Stars
12.5k
Tracked growth
+6%
Maturity
Last commit
52d ago
Language
TypeScript
License
MIT
Cost to run
Requires OpenAI and Zilliz Cloud (Milvus) API keys.

Writes a readable, linked markdown graph of your code (no embeddings or external index), letting agents use a local, regenerable map rather than re-exploring the repo each run.

Stars
5.6k
Tracked growth
not tracked long enough
Maturity
Last commit
1d ago
Language
TypeScript
License
MIT
Cost to run
Your API key, per-use
0%+15%88 tracked days
zilliztech/claude-contexttrailhq/Graft

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.

Axisclaude-contextGraft
Context depth
How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository.
Whole-repo retrieval
Whole-repo analysis
Noise control
How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only.
Hybrid search + filters
Minimal filters
Customization
How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config.
Configurable rules
Config options
Privacy
Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only.
Cloud APIs (your keys)
Fully local possible
Model freedom
Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one.
Bring-your-own-key
Bring-your-own-model
Setup ease
What it takes to get a first useful run out of it.
API key + config
Two-command setup

Which one to pick

Pick claude-context if…

Cost-effective — provides whole-repo semantic retrieval (hybrid BM25 + dense embeddings) as an MCP server to give deep context to Claude Code while lowering token usage.

Runs in cli, ide, coding-agent-plugin. Works with byok, openai.

Pick Graft if…

Efficiency-first — pick Graft when you want much faster and cheaper agent runs (often with equal or better correctness) by providing a repo-wide local node graph that agents can read directly.

  • Privacy: Fully local possible (5/5 against 3/5)
  • Setup ease: Two-command setup (5/5 against 3/5)
Runs in cli, coding-agent-plugin, ide. Works with byok, openai, anthropic, local-ollama, other-fixed.

What people want from each one

Questions people ask

Is claude-context better than Graft?

Graft leads on privacy and setup ease. claude-context does not take any axis by a clear margin. claude-context is worth picking when cost-effective — provides whole-repo semantic retrieval (hybrid BM25 + dense embeddings) as an MCP server to give deep context to Claude Code while lowering token usage.

Which of claude-context and Graft keeps my code private?

claude-context: Cloud APIs (your keys) (3/5). Graft: Fully local possible (5/5).

What does each one cost to run?

claude-context: Requires OpenAI and Zilliz Cloud (Milvus) API keys.. Graft: Your API key, per-use.

Full profiles: zilliztech/claude-context and trailhq/Graft. Everything else in Codebase context.