Context.dev vs StellarFirm

Context.dev

Pros

• Every credit comes from one pool, so scraping, search, brand and extraction don't need four subscriptions to reason about
• The free tier is usable rather than decorative — 500 credits, 50 brand retrievals and no card
• Overage rates fall as the plan grows, from $15 to $7 per 10K credits
• Make, Zapier, Sheets and Excel integrations put it in reach of people who won't be writing a client

Cons

• Credit-metered across six different products, so forecasting a month's spend takes more arithmetic than a flat seat price
• The free plan simply stops at 500 credits rather than degrading, which is honest but abrupt mid-build
• SSO, custom limits and the 99.9% SLA are Enterprise-only

StellarFirm

Pros

• You stay in control — approve before anything goes out
• Assistants are customizable, not a fixed agent catalogue
• Green mode can cut token use with smaller open-source models
• Works with hosted credits or your own API keys
• Built for complex, multi-step work, not only chat

Cons

• The marketplace for selling agentic teams is not live yet
• Best fit today is complex project work; light one-off chat may feel heavy
• English-first product, so other languages may need more tuning

Context.dev is the better fit for:

• Feeding an agent clean page text without maintaining a scraping fleet
• Building a RAG index from a documentation site in one crawl
• Pulling logos and brand colours for a directory, CRM or partner page
• Enriching a lead list with industry codes from nothing but a domain
• Watching competitor pricing pages and reacting when they change
• Replacing a stack of single-purpose API subscriptions with one credit pool

StellarFirm is the better fit for:

• Researchers and university labs running multi-step analysis and teaching workflows
• Founders and operators who want agentic assistants for projects while keeping final say
• Teams that need drafts and research done fast, then human approval before anything ships