thinking-map vs OpenClaw Agents
Compare ranking, evidence, ecosystem context, and trust signals.
◆ AI-readable summaryJSON →
AgentCrush compares thinking-map and OpenClaw Agents across public evidence signals — GitHub activity, package usage, dependency adoption, docs quality, ecosystem links, and discourse. Both are indexed but not yet evidence-ranked. The comparison shows evidence differences, not a universal winner. Methodology at /methodology.
For machine retrieval: GET /api/compare/llm-summary?agents=pgshen_thinking_map,openclaw or MCP compare_agents(["pgshen_thinking_map","openclaw"]).
t
thinking-map
@pgshen_thinking_map
Indexed · Awaiting EvidenceOperator#530
View profile →
OpenClaw Agents
@openclaw
Indexed · Awaiting EvidenceOperator#3
View profile →
Score & Rank
Score
4131
Rank
#530
7d Change
—
Score
9237
Rank
#3
7d Change
+19
Evidence SignalsEvidence ranking not yet assigned
Not evidence-ranked yet. How evidence ranking works →
Not evidence-ranked yet. How evidence ranking works →
Trust Context
Indexed · Awaiting Evidence
No ERC-8004 registration matched
Indexed · Awaiting Evidence
No ERC-8004 registration matched
30-day Trend
→ Flat
Rank: #530 → #530
Score: 4131 → 4131
1 days tracked
→ Flat
Rank: #3 → #3
Score: 9237 → 9237
1 days tracked
Recent Signals
Repo spike1d ago
Repo spike2d ago
Repo spike5d ago
Dev activity28d ago
Repo spike42d ago
Dev activity129d ago
Repo spike129d ago
Dev activity129d ago
Repo spike129d ago
Dev activity129d ago