Memharness vs Myco Brain

Pricing, capabilities and platforms side by side. Prices are as of the "Pricing checked" date in the table.

Memharness

The core premise is storing facts, not strings, with two independent time axes: when something became true in the world and when the agent learned it — so querying past agent states is a real query, not archaeology through logs. Everything lives in a single SQLite file, which means the storage layer makes zero LLM or network calls and stays auditable. Recall combines hybrid vector search and full-text search with a source-staleness signal, so older or superseded sources rank down automatically. Where it breaks: the SQLite backend is a hard ceiling for teams expecting distributed writes or high-concurrency production deployments. Teams hitting that ceiling will need to treat memharness as a pattern to port, not a service to scale horizontally.

Myco Brain

The core mechanic is deterministic writes: the application code writes facts to Myco's Postgres store, not the LLM, so every stored fact carries a source document, a confidence score, and a full audit trail queryable via brain_why. One MCP server exposes that memory to Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Windsurf, and any other MCP-compatible client simultaneously — write from Claude Desktop, retrieve from Cursor, no sync step required. The vendor publishes a 500-question LongMemEval result and a recall@5 figure using a recency reranker, both on the full benchmark set. The hard ceiling appears when your agents need to act on what they remember — Myco stores and retrieves facts; it does not plan, route, or execute tasks, so orchestration logic lives elsewhere.

Specs come from each tool's own site and docs (how we test). AIDiveForge is editorially independent.