headroom vs planning-with-files
Side-by-side comparison of two AI agent tools
Short answer
- headroom is growing faster: +1,380 GitHub stars in the last 30 days vs +590 for planning-with-files.
- Pick headroom for: compresses tool outputs, logs, RAG chunks, files, and conversation history before they reach LLMs. Pick planning-with-files for: persistent file-based planning and context recovery for AI coding agents and long-running tasks.
From GitHub data refreshed daily.
h
headroomopen-source
Compresses tool outputs, logs, RAG chunks, files, and conversation history before they reach LLMs
p
planning-with-filesopen-source
Persistent file-based planning and context recovery for AI coding agents and long-running tasks
Metrics
| headroom | planning-with-files | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 74.3k | 27.3k |
| Star velocity /mo | 1.4k | 590 |
| Commits (90d) | 1.2k | 228 |
| Releases (6m) | 10 | 10 |
| Downloads (30d, npm + PyPI) | 246.3K | 2.7K |
| Overall score | 0.8788654416490241 | 0.7798501915116138 |
FAQ
- Which is more popular, headroom or planning-with-files?
- headroom has more GitHub stars (74,314 vs 27,264).
- Which is more actively developed, headroom or planning-with-files?
- headroom had more commits in the last 90 days (1,226 vs 228).
- Should I use headroom or planning-with-files?
- 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.