Last EHR vs WorkBuddy

Last EHR and WorkBuddy are both ai agent apps tracked by AIDiveForge. Below is a side-by-side comparison of pricing, capabilities, platforms, and ownership — sourced from each tool's live website and verified before publishing.

Last EHR

The tool wraps four FHIR operations — patient search, chart read, note creation, and observation recording — into a chat agent that runs as the signed-in user, bounded by whatever Medplum AccessPolicy you already have. Every write surfaces as an approval card showing exactly what will be saved before it touches the chart. The same four tools expose as an MCP server for Claude Desktop or Claude Code, read-only by default. The ceiling is visible early: four tools, one backend, one EHR platform. Teams that need more than that are writing their own.

WorkBuddy

WorkBuddy runs as a local-first agent on the desktop, autonomously chaining file access, web search, and document generation into single-prompt workflows. The Tencent ecosystem fit is real: WeCom and WeChat integrations mean scheduling and messaging tasks route without extra setup, which matters if your organization already lives there. Outside that ecosystem, the integration surface narrows fast. Teams running mixed SaaS stacks report reaching for MCP-compatible connectors to fill the gaps — which adds configuration overhead the tool is supposed to eliminate. Self-hosted execution is the headline privacy story, but the closed-source codebase means you audit what the vendor discloses, not the code itself.

Attribute	Last EHR	WorkBuddy
Pricing	Free	Paid
Price	—	$9.95/mo
Free trial	No	No
Open source	Yes	No
Has API	Yes	Yes
Self-hosted option	Yes	Yes
Platforms	Web, self-hosted	Desktop (Windows, macOS, Linux); remote access via Slack, Telegram, Discord, WeChat
Released	—	2026-03-09
Pros	Approval-gated writes — the agent proposes, you confirm, nothing saves silently — so you can prototype AI chart edits without a runaway write reaching a patient record. Runs as the signed-in Medplum user scoped by your existing AccessPolicy, which means you get access control for free instead of rebuilding it in the agent layer. Stores no patient data of its own, so there is no second compliance surface to audit or secure beyond what Medplum already covers. Provider-agnostic model key (OpenAI or Anthropic), so switching models is a single environment variable change rather than a code change when costs or output quality shift. MCP server mode exposes the same four tools to Claude Desktop or Claude Code read-only by default, so teams can wire AI chart access into existing developer tooling without building a separate integration.	Local-first task execution keeps data on the user's machine, so workflows handling sensitive documents avoid the exposure risk that comes with cloud-routed agents. Single-prompt initiation for multi-step workflows — web search, spreadsheet processing, and document generation chained together — so the work that normally requires three open tabs and manual copy-paste completes in one request. Native WeCom and WeChat integration means scheduling, messaging, and file tasks inside the Tencent ecosystem require no connector setup, which removes the glue-code burden for teams already on those platforms. API availability lets engineering teams embed WorkBuddy's agent capabilities into existing internal tools, so the automation layer doesn't require users to switch contexts into a separate product. Self-hosted deployment option gives infrastructure teams control over where the agent runs, so organizations with strict data residency requirements aren't forced into a shared-cloud model.
Cons	The agent covers exactly four FHIR tools. Any clinical workflow that requires a fifth operation — scheduling, prior auth, document retrieval — hits a hard stop, and teams extend by forking the codebase, at which point they are maintaining their own agent layer. Medplum is the only supported FHIR backend. Teams running Azure Health Data Services, Google Cloud Healthcare API, or a self-hosted HAPI instance cannot use this without replacing the backend integration entirely — at which point they are evaluating tools built for backend-agnostic FHIR. A managed tier with BAA coverage is listed as in development and not yet available. Teams under HIPAA that cannot self-host and sign their own BAA with Medplum have no production-ready path here, and will move to a vendor with signed agreements in place.	Workflows that cross outside the Tencent ecosystem — touching Slack, Google Workspace, Salesforce, or other common SaaS tools — require MCP connector configuration that adds setup overhead and maintenance surface the product's pitch implicitly promises to eliminate; teams with heterogeneous stacks hit this wall on the first real cross-tool workflow. The closed-source codebase means security teams cannot verify what 'local execution' actually means at the code level; organizations whose compliance posture requires a source audit switch to an open-source agent framework instead. Complex branching logic — workflows where step three depends on what step two returned, with different paths for different outcomes — is not documented as a supported capability; teams needing conditional task routing report building a separate orchestration layer, which defeats the no-code premise.

Bottom line

Last EHR is free while WorkBuddy is paid; Last EHR is open source. Choose based on which difference matters most for your workflow.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between Last EHR and WorkBuddy?

Last EHR is Free and open source, while WorkBuddy is Paid. Compare pricing, free trial, API, platforms, and pros/cons in the table above on AIDiveForge.

Is Last EHR better than WorkBuddy?

It depends on your workflow. Use the side-by-side attributes (pricing, open source, API, self-hosted, platforms) to decide. AIDiveForge does not rank a universal winner — we publish verified facts so you can choose.