Do coding agents recommend Paraglide JS?
Paraglide JS was chosen in 8% of 224 judged internationalization sessions, ranking fourth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
Paraglide JS was chosen in 8% of 224 judged internationalization sessions, ranking fourth. It was also raised as a candidate in 51 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in internationalization inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Paraglide JS. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | Internationalization |
| Sessions in the category | 224 |
| Sessions where Paraglide JS was chosen | 18 |
| Install share | 8% |
| Rank in category | 4 of 20 |
| Codebases it won in | 2 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 51 |
| Chosen when considered | 26% |
| Site | inlang.com |
By agent
With 18 wins spread across three agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Paraglide JS | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 77 | 6 | 8% |
| Codex | 78 | 6 | 8% |
| Cursor | 69 | 6 | 9% |
By who was asking
Paraglide JS does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 25% of sessions asked as junior developer and 0% of those asked as senior engineer.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Paraglide JS | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 54 | 0 | 0% |
| Junior developer | 69 | 17 | 25% |
| Senior engineer | 47 | 0 | 0% |
| Enterprise team | 54 | 1 | 2% |
What Paraglide JS was up against
The full ranking in internationalization, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | next-intl | 57 | 25% |
| 2 | Django translation framework | 45 | 20% |
| 3 | Symfony Translation | 18 | 8% |
| 4 | Paraglide JS (this page) | 18 | 8% |
| 5 | Rails I18n | 17 | 8% |
| 6 | i18next | 14 | 6% |
| 7 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 12 | 5% |
| 8 | Vue I18n | 10 | 4% |
What this means
Paraglide JS was raised in 51 sessions and chosen in 18. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough.
Where these numbers come from
The 224 sessions in internationalization are part of a published set of 6,458, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every internationalization run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Paraglide JS: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.
<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->
Common questions
Do coding agents recommend Paraglide JS?
Yes. Paraglide JS was chosen in 18 of the 224 judged sessions in internationalization, a 8% install share, ranking fourth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Paraglide JS?
In 6 of the 77 sessions in internationalization run with Claude Code, which is 8%.
Do different coding agents treat Paraglide JS differently?
Not much. The three agents chose it at similar rates, between 8% and 9% of their runs.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 63 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.
How often is Paraglide JS considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 51 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 18. That is a 26% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 6,458 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor inside 63 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.