Head to head
haiku.rag vs HiddenContent
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Local-first agentic RAG with citations - hybrid search, reranking, multimodal document retrieval
Full listing
No reviews yet
Check a document for hidden text before your agent reads it. PDF, Office, RTF, HTML.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours haiku.rag (92/100 against 79). HiddenContent is hosted and callable through the gateway; haiku.rag runs on your own machine. haiku.rag has noticeably more public adoption.
| haiku.rag | HiddenContent | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A92/100 | B79/100 |
| Adoption | Established | New |
| GitHub stars | 609 | – |
| Downloads / week | – | 71 |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | No | Yes |
| Tools | — | — |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-18 | — |
| Category | AI and agents | AI and agents |