A while ago I came across a really good article on the future of API tooling:
https://efp.asia/blog/2025/12/24/api-tooling-crisis/
It lays out a set of criteria for what modern API clients should look like:
- Local-first, filesystem-centric: collections and requests live directly in the project repo
- Support for OpenAPI specs and GraphQL schemas, plus straightforward testing
- Zero login wall: works fully offline without accounts or mandatory cloud sync
- Git-native collaboration: uses version control instead of proprietary cloud workspaces or seat licenses
- Native performance: built with high-performance tech (e.g. Rust), not browser wrappers
- Extensible design: modular plugin architecture that doesn’t bloat the core
- Universal imports: OpenAPI, GraphQL, Postman collections, etc.
- Proxy agnostic: works cleanly with interception tools like Charles or mitmproxy
- Scripting and auth flows: pre-request and post-response hooks
- Straightforward testing: built-in code-based testing of API responses
I agree with all of these. The only thing I’d add is pricing as another important dimension.
Recently I was experimenting with a pricing MCP and decided to run a quick test: evaluate all the API clients I know against these criteria using https://pulse.pricingsaas.com/.
Scoring was simple:
Each principle is rated 0 (missing), 1 (partial), or 2 (fully met). Final score is normalized to a 10-point scale.
Overall rankings (out of 10)
- Bruno — 8/10
- Voiden — 8/10
- Yaak — 7/10
- Insomnia — 6/10
- cURL — 6/10
- HTTPie — 5/10
- Postman — 5/10
- Requestly — 5/10
- Hoppscotch — 4/10
- Apidog — 4/10
Key takeaway: no perfect API client yet
Every tool fails on at least a few of the 11 principles, so none fully matches the “ideal” API tooling model. The ceiling right now seems to be around 8/10.
What separates the top tools (Bruno, Voiden, Yaak)
The strongest tools tend to share a few traits:
- Local-first, filesystem-based storage
- Git-native collaboration
- No forced login (or minimal account gating)
Where they still fall short is usually native performance, since most GUI tools are built on Electron.
A few structural patterns across the space
- Electron is the default weakness Most GUI tools (Bruno, Insomnia, Postman, Requestly, Hoppscotch, Apidog) rely on Electron. The only real exception is Yaak, which uses Tauri + Rust and is much closer to true native performance.
- Zero-login is a clear dividing line Several major tools are effectively excluded because they require accounts: Postman, Insomnia, Hoppscotch, Apidog.
- Pricing is becoming a core constraint Most tools are increasingly account-gated or paid-tier driven. Voiden stands out as fully free with no tiering, while Postman is heavily penalized due to its pricing model and limited free tier.
Tool-level notes (high level)
- Bruno: strong balance of scripting, testing, and Git-native design, but held back by Electron
- Voiden: most aligned overall, especially due to being fully free and extensible
- Yaak: best native performance, but lacks scripting and testing
- Insomnia: strong feature set, but weakened by login and pricing dependence
- Postman: best-in-class scripting and testing, but cloud-first and heavy
- cURL / HTTPie: great primitives, but not full API design environments
Final insight
The ideal API client would likely combine:
- Yaak’s native Rust performance
- Voiden or Bruno-level scripting, testing, and Git-native workflows
- Right now, the space is split between:
- Local-first developer tools (Bruno, Voiden, Yaak)
- Cloud-first enterprise platforms (Postman, Apidog, Hoppscotch, Insomnia)
Full results here: https://share.pricingsaas.com/reports/ps_-1DO_vX/20260619_220350_52a40f15/api-client-scorecard-v5.html
