--- title: "ECC vs Magick" type: "comparison" canonical_url: "https://www.graphcanon.com/compare/affaan-m-ecc-vs-oneirocom-magick" tools: ["affaan-m-ecc", "oneirocom-magick"] --- # ECC vs Magick *GraphCanon updated Sep 30, 2026* ## Verdict Pick ECC if eCC is an agent harness performance optimization system for AI agents and large language models, emphasizing skills, instincts, memory, security, and research-first development; pick Magick if magick is a TypeScript-based toolkit focused on the development and fine-tuning of AI agents with integrations for large language models and support for no-code visual scripting. [ECC](https://ecc.tools) reports 261k GitHub stars, 39k forks, and 227 open issues, last pushed Sep 17, 2026. [Magick](https://magickml.com) has 847 stars, 140 forks, and 32 open issues, last pushed Jun 24, 2025. Figures are from public GitHub metadata via [ECC's repository](https://github.com/affaan-m/ECC) and [Magick's repository](https://github.com/Oneirocom/Magick). | | [ECC](/tools/affaan-m-ecc.md) | [Magick](/tools/oneirocom-magick.md) | | --- | --- | --- | | Tagline | Agent harness performance optimization system for AI agents and LLMs | Cutting-edge toolkit for AI builders | | Stars | 261,432 | 847 | | Forks | 39,132 | 140 | | Open issues | 227 | 32 | | Language | JavaScript | TypeScript | | Adopt for | ECC is an agent harness performance optimization system for AI agents and large language models, emphasizing skills, instincts, memory, security, and research-first development. | Magick is a TypeScript-based toolkit focused on the development and fine-tuning of AI agents with integrations for large language models and support for no-code visual scripting. | | Persona | - | - | | Runtime | - | - | | License | MIT | Magick operates under a license that differs from typical open-source licenses. Users need to verify compatibility with their projects' licensing needs. | | Categories | AI Agents, Developer Tools, LLM Frameworks | AI Agents, Evaluation & Observability, LLM Frameworks, Model Training | ## Trust and health _Sourced signals - not a safety guarantee. No winner column._ | | [ECC](/tools/affaan-m-ecc.md) | [Magick](/tools/oneirocom-magick.md) | | --- | --- | --- | | Maintenance | Very active (96%) | Dormant (18%) | | Days since push | 0d | 452d | | Open issues (now) | 227 | 32 | | Stars delta | +21k (30d) | +5 (30d) | | Open issues delta | +105 (30d) | 0 (30d) | | Owner type | User | Organization | | Full report | [trust report](/tools/affaan-m-ecc/trust.md) | [trust report](/tools/oneirocom-magick/trust.md) | ## Decision facts: ECC - **Pricing:** freemium - ECC offers a free GitHub App for open-source projects, while ECC Pro provides support for private repositories at a cost of $19 per seat per month. - **Requirements:** ECC is available as a JavaScript tool and can be installed via guided setup or native plugin commands. - **Adopt for:** ECC is an agent harness performance optimization system for AI agents and large language models, emphasizing skills, instincts, memory, security, and research-first development. ## Decision facts: Magick - **Pricing:** unknown - No explicit pricing details provided in the repository data, indicating a trial or enterprise model potentially requiring direct inquiries for specific terms. - **Adopt for:** Magick is a TypeScript-based toolkit focused on the development and fine-tuning of AI agents with integrations for large language models and support for no-code visual scripting. - **License detail:** Magick operates under a license that differs from typical open-source licenses. Users need to verify compatibility with their projects' licensing needs. ## Choose when ### Choose ECC if… - ECC is primarily JavaScript; Magick is TypeScript. - License: ECC is MIT, Magick is Other. - Pricing: ECC offers a free GitHub App for open-source projects, while ECC Pro provides support for private repositories at a cost of $19 per seat per month.. - Requirements: ECC is available as a JavaScript tool and can be installed via guided setup or native plugin commands.. - Tags unique to ECC: ai-agents, anthropic, claude, claude-code. - Also covers Developer Tools. - Use ECC when you need to optimize the performance of AI agents and large language models, particularly if you are working with platforms like Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, or Cursor. ### Choose Magick if… - Magick is primarily TypeScript; ECC is JavaScript. - License: Magick is Other, ECC is MIT. - Pricing: No explicit pricing details provided in the repository data, indicating a trial or enterprise model potentially requiring direct inquiries for specific terms.. - Tags unique to Magick: agent, agi, ai, blueprints-visual-scripting. - Also covers Evaluation & Observability, Model Training. - - You are building AI agents or virtual assistants using large language models like Gemini, GPT-3, or GPT-4 that require visual scripting capabilities. ## When NOT to use ECC - Avoid ECC if your project does not align with the specific platforms it supports, such as Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, or Cursor. - Do not use ECC if you are looking for a free solution for private repositories, as ECC Pro requires a subscription for private repo support. ## When NOT to use Magick - - You are working on projects in a language other than TypeScript or prefer languages known for rapid prototyping without type safety. - - Your team strictly adheres to code-only workflows without interest in visual scripting capabilities provided by tools like node editors and blueprint systems. - - The project requires strict adherence to an open-source license; Magick's licensing is not standard OSS, which can affect integration requirements. ## Common questions ### What is the difference between ECC and Magick? ECC: Agent harness performance optimization system for AI agents and LLMs. Magick: Cutting-edge toolkit for AI builders. See the comparison table for live GitHub stats and shared categories. ### When should I choose ECC over Magick? Choose ECC over Magick when ECC is primarily JavaScript; Magick is TypeScript; License: ECC is MIT, Magick is Other; Pricing: ECC offers a free GitHub App for open-source projects, while ECC Pro provides support for private repositories at a cost of $19 per seat per month.; Requirements: ECC is available as a JavaScript tool and can be installed via guided setup or native plugin commands.; Tags unique to ECC: ai-agents, anthropic, claude, claude-code; Also covers Developer Tools; Use ECC when you need to optimize the performance of AI agents and large language models, particularly if you are working with platforms like Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, or Cursor. ### When should I choose Magick over ECC? Choose Magick over ECC when Magick is primarily TypeScript; ECC is JavaScript; License: Magick is Other, ECC is MIT; Pricing: No explicit pricing details provided in the repository data, indicating a trial or enterprise model potentially requiring direct inquiries for specific terms.; Tags unique to Magick: agent, agi, ai, blueprints-visual-scripting; Also covers Evaluation & Observability, Model Training; - You are building AI agents or virtual assistants using large language models like Gemini, GPT-3, or GPT-4 that require visual scripting capabilities. ### When should I avoid ECC? Avoid ECC if your project does not align with the specific platforms it supports, such as Claude Code, Codex, Opencode, or Cursor. Do not use ECC if you are looking for a free solution for private repositories, as ECC Pro requires a subscription for private repo support. ### When should I avoid Magick? - You are working on projects in a language other than TypeScript or prefer languages known for rapid prototyping without type safety. - Your team strictly adheres to code-only workflows without interest in visual scripting capabilities provided by tools like node editors and blueprint systems. - The project requires strict adherence to an open-source license; Magick's licensing is not standard OSS, which can affect integration requirements. ### Is ECC or Magick more popular on GitHub? ECC has more GitHub stars (261,432 vs 847). Stars measure visibility, not whether either tool fits your constraints. ### Are ECC and Magick open source? Yes - both are open-source projects on GitHub (ECC: MIT, Magick: Other). ### Where can I find alternatives to ECC or Magick? GraphCanon lists graph-backed alternatives at [ECC alternatives](/tools/affaan-m-ecc/alternatives) and [Magick alternatives](/tools/oneirocom-magick/alternatives) ([ECC markdown twin](/tools/affaan-m-ecc/alternatives.md), [Magick markdown twin](/tools/oneirocom-magick/alternatives.md)), ranked by typed relationship edges rather than popularity votes. ### Is there a machine-readable version of this comparison? Yes. The markdown twin at [this comparison](/compare/affaan-m-ecc-vs-oneirocom-magick.md) mirrors this page for agents and LLM crawlers, with the same stats table and FAQ answers. ### Which is better maintained, ECC or Magick? ECC: Very active. Magick: Dormant. Compare maintenance labels, days since push, and release cadence in the trust section below - stars alone do not measure maintenance. ### Where are the full trust reports for ECC and Magick? GraphCanon publishes per-repo trust reports with dated maintenance, provenance, and scan summaries: [ECC trust report](/tools/affaan-m-ecc/trust); [Magick trust report](/tools/oneirocom-magick/trust). --- **Machine-readable endpoints** - JSON: [`/api/graphcanon/graph?tool=affaan-m-ecc`](/api/graphcanon/graph?tool=affaan-m-ecc) - LLM index: [/llms.txt](/llms.txt) - Full corpus: [/llms-full.txt](/llms-full.txt) _GraphCanon - The knowledge graph for AI development. https://www.graphcanon.com/_