claude-context vs Graft
Side-by-side comparison of two AI agent tools
Short answer
- Graft is growing faster: +1,065 GitHub stars in the last 30 days vs +75 for claude-context.
- Pick claude-context for: code search MCP for Claude Code. Pick Graft for: turbocharge Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Gemini & every coding agent: faster, cheaper, with contextual.
From GitHub data refreshed daily.
c
claude-contextopen-source
Code search MCP for Claude Code. Make entire codebase the context for any coding agent.
G
Graftopen-source
Turbocharge Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Gemini & every coding agent: faster, cheaper, with contextual understanding specific to your codebase.
Metrics
| claude-context | Graft | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 12.6k | 9.5k |
| Star velocity /mo | 75 | 1.1k |
| Commits (90d) | 3 | 506 |
| Releases (6m) | 0 | 0 |
| Overall score | 0.3535113474620865 | 0.7281102466707609 |
FAQ
- Which is more popular, claude-context or Graft?
- claude-context has more GitHub stars (12,585 vs 9,504).
- Which is more actively developed, claude-context or Graft?
- Graft had more commits in the last 90 days (506 vs 3).
- Should I use claude-context or Graft?
- Compare their capabilities, limitations and "best for" notes above. Both are open source, so trying each on a small task is the fastest way to decide.