Picked from the 11 tools on this site by what they're actually used for — not by benchmark scores.
| Tool | What it is | Free tier | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nothing tagged for this use case yet. | |||
What actually matters for code is not the model's leaderboard position — it's whether it can see enough of your project to stop guessing. A tool that reads your repository and follows the existing style saves you review time; one that only sees the pasted snippet will 'fix' code that wasn't broken. Check whether the assistant runs inside your editor or in a separate tab, because that single difference decides how often you actually reach for it.
The second deciding factor is how it behaves when it doesn't know something. On real repositories the useful assistants say which file they are unsure about; the unhelpful ones invent a function name and let the compiler find out. Test this deliberately: give it a file with one renamed symbol and see whether it notices or writes confident nonsense.
Start with the one that already has a free tier covering your volume, then check the context column: coding work usually breaks on input size before it breaks on model quality. If two of them look equal, pick the one whose paid tier you'd actually renew, because that's the one you'll keep using after the novelty wears off.
Everything else — ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok — is on the main comparison table; they show up here only if their own documentation frames them that way.