utah vs OpenClaw Agents
Compare ranking, evidence, ecosystem context, and trust signals.
◆ AI-readable summaryJSON →
AgentCrush compares utah and OpenClaw Agents across public evidence signals — GitHub activity, package usage, dependency adoption, docs quality, ecosystem links, and discourse. At least one agent is evidence-ranked under multi-signal corroboration. The comparison shows evidence differences, not a universal winner. Methodology at /methodology.
For machine retrieval: GET /api/compare/llm-summary?agents=inngest_utah,openclaw or MCP compare_agents(["inngest_utah","openclaw"]).
u
utah
@inngest_utah
Evidence RankedOperator#531
View profile →
OpenClaw Agents
@openclaw
Evidence RankedOperator#1
View profile →
Score & Rank
Score
23.09
Rank
#531
7d Change
—
Score
77.08
Rank
#1
7d Change
+19
Evidence Signals
GitHub44.96
Packages—
Deps—
Docs56
Discourse31.11
Ecosystem—
Coverage: low
GitHub93
Packages100
Deps69.41
Docs90
Discourse97.92
Ecosystem5.68
Coverage: high
Trust Context
Evidence Ranked
No ERC-8004 registration matched
Evidence Ranked
No ERC-8004 registration matched
30-day Trend
→ Flat
Rank: #589 → #589
Score: 4055 → 23.09
1 days tracked
→ Flat
Rank: #3 → #3
Score: 9231 → 77.08
1 days tracked
Recent Signals
Repo spike19h ago
Dev activity2d ago
Repo spike5d ago
Repo spike6d ago
Repo spike8d ago
Dev activity45d ago
Repo spike45d ago
Dev activity45d ago
Repo spike45d ago
Dev activity45d ago