Head to head
Gigamail vs no_human
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
Your real mailbox and calendar for your agent (M365/IMAP); a human approves every send.
Full listing
No reviews yet
File a task with your local no_human and check on it: task_add and task_status over stdio.
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 Gigamail (89/100 against 75). no_human has noticeably more public adoption.
| Gigamail | no_human | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | A89/100 | B75/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | Established |
| GitHub stars | 5 | 317 |
| Downloads / week | – | 330 |
| Runs where | Your machine (local) | Your machine (local) |
| Gateway-ready | No | No |
| Tools | 29 | 2 |
| Write actions | 9 | 1 |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Last release | 2026-09-17 | 2026-09-19 |
| Category | Productivity | Productivity |