loopy vs oh-my-hermes
The two are close in size: 3.1k stars for loopy, 1.7k for oh-my-hermes. Over the days we have tracked them loopy moved +4367.1% and oh-my-hermes +90.1%, so loopy is growing faster right now.
They split the axes: loopy leads on context depth, oh-my-hermes on privacy and model freedom.
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
Combines a public, curated catalog of reusable agent loops with an installable in-agent skill that discovers, crafts, audits, runs, and prepares loops for publication.
- Stars
- 3.1k
- Tracked growth
- +4367.1%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 2d ago
- Language
- JavaScript
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Requires cloud agent provider (may incur provider cost)
Provides a local-first operating layer for Hermes that enforces explicit evidence boundaries and verification gates while keeping executors and provider access observable.
- Stars
- 1.7k
- Tracked growth
- +90.1%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 57m ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Your API key, per-use
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.
| Axis | loopy | oh-my-hermes |
|---|---|---|
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 analysis | ●●●●● Diff + related files |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● Acceptance gating | ●●●●● Evidence gates |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Adapt & save loops | ●●●●● Configurable workflows |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Depends on cloud agents | ●●●●● Self-hostable |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Multiple agents supported | ●●●●● Bring your own key |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● One-command install | ●●●●● One-command setup |
Which one to pick
Pick loopy if…
Easy setup — a one-command npx installer and in-agent slash-commands let you discover, adapt, run, and publish repeatable agent workflows with built-in acceptance checks and explicit approvals.
- Context depth: Whole-repo analysis (5/5 against 3/5)
Pick oh-my-hermes if…
Local-first control plane — pick OMH when you want an installable, evidence-first workflow catalog and gating layer for Hermes that keeps execution ownership explicit and configurable.
- Privacy: Self-hostable (4/5 against 2/5)
- Model freedom: Bring your own key (5/5 against 3/5)
What people want from each one
Forward-Future/loopy
Questions people ask
Is loopy better than oh-my-hermes?
They split the axes: loopy leads on context depth, oh-my-hermes on privacy and model freedom. loopy is worth picking when easy setup — a one-command npx installer and in-agent slash-commands let you discover, adapt, run, and publish repeatable agent workflows with built-in acceptance checks and explicit approvals.
Which of loopy and oh-my-hermes keeps my code private?
loopy: Depends on cloud agents (2/5). oh-my-hermes: Self-hostable (4/5).
What does each one cost to run?
loopy: Requires cloud agent provider (may incur provider cost). oh-my-hermes: Your API key, per-use.
Full profiles: Forward-Future/loopy and rlaope/oh-my-hermes. Everything else in Workflow & graph engines.