# 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.

Source: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-paraglide-js
Published: 2026-09-11
Publisher: Armature, Inc. (https://armature.tech)

---

> 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 6,455, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: [how we measured this](/library/how-we-measured-this).

Every internationalization run can be replayed on [the board](/leaderboards/internationalization).

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.

## Read next

- [How to get picked for internationalization by coding agents](https://armature.tech/library/internationalization-coding-agents-playbook) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/internationalization-coding-agents-playbook.md)
- [Do coding agents recommend next-intl?](https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-next-intl) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-next-intl.md)
- [Do coding agents recommend Django translation framework?](https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-django-translation-framework) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-django-translation-framework.md)
- [Do Claude Code, Codex and Cursor pick the same tools?](https://armature.tech/library/do-claude-code-and-codex-agree) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-claude-code-and-codex-agree.md)

---

Armature helps software products get discovered and used by coding agents.
Service: https://armature.tech/discoverability · Results: https://armature.tech/leaderboards/sectors · Contact: contact@armature.tech