Claude Code vs CurieTech AI: Which Writes Better DataWeave?
- Alex Martinez
- 2 days ago
- 3 min read
Two AIs. Four DataWeave puzzles. One question:
Which one writes better MuleSoft code?
I put Claude Code (running in MAX effort mode) head-to-head against CurieTech AI to solve Advent of Code 2025 — Days 1 and 2, both parts. Same input. Same expected output. Side-by-side execution times in the DataWeave Playground.
This is also the first video in a new series I'm starting: AI Showdown: MuleSoft Edition (2026) 🥊
TL;DR
Both AIs got the correct answer on all 4 puzzles. Execution times in the Playground were within milliseconds of each other. The real differences showed up in how they got there — code readability, type usage, error handling, and whether the AI actually runs the code before handing it back.
The setup
Claude Code — VS Code extension, MAX effort mode, Sonnet 4.5
CurieTech AI — tested two ways:
Day 1: via the CurieTech MCP server inside Claude Code
Day 2: directly through the chat at platform.curietech.ai
Challenges: Advent of Code 2025, Days 1 and 2 (both parts)
Benchmarking: dw::util::Timer::time() in the DataWeave Playground
Watch the full breakdown
What surprised me
✅ Execution times were ridiculously close
We're talking millisecond-level differences — even running in the browser-based Playground. Sometimes Claude edged out, sometimes CurieTech did. Honestly? Coin-flip territory.
✅ CurieTech actually runs the code
This is the big one. CurieTech executes the DataWeave it generates before returning the answer. Claude doesn't — it just produces code and hopes for the best.
The result: I caught a runtime error in Claude's Day 2 solution that only surfaced when I ran it locally. Had to feed the error back into Claude for a second pass. CurieTech never had that problem.
✅ CurieTech writes typed function signatures
Look at the difference:
Claude (untyped):
fun claude(input) = ...CurieTech (typed):
fun curietech(input: Array<Number>): Number = ...When you're reading code cold (or coming back to it months later), those types make a huge difference.
✅ CurieTech adds performance notes
On Day 2 Part 1, CurieTech proactively warned me:
"Ranges like this are tiny (~7 IDs), so brute forcing works here. If you ever face huge ranges, you'd want to generate candidates, loop over half-lengths, and concatenate instead of scanning every number."
That kind of contextual insight is genuinely useful — especially for folks newer to DataWeave.
✅ Claude Code wins on workflow
If you live in VS Code or your terminal, Claude Code's integration is hard to beat. File context, multi-step tasks, the whole ecosystem. CurieTech's MCP server brings some of that into Claude Code, but the native experience is still tighter.
❌ Claude can ship broken code
As mentioned — Day 2 had a runtime error that wasted time. Not a dealbreaker, but worth knowing.
❌ CurieTech needed a nudge on Day 1 Part 2
The first attempt got the wrong answer. After I gave it more context about the input format, it produced a verified solution. Slight friction, but the recovery was clean.
So who wins?
Honestly? There's no clear winner. Each has real strengths:
Pick Claude Code if you value workflow integration, live in VS Code, and don't mind catching the occasional runtime error.
Pick CurieTech AI if you value verified-running code, typed function signatures, and inline performance notes.
For someone newer to DataWeave or AI coding tools, CurieTech is probably the gentler entry point — the chat UI is approachable and the verified-solution guarantee is reassuring.
For experienced devs already deep in the Claude Code ecosystem, Claude Code with the CurieTech MCP server is a great hybrid — you get the workflow you want plus the verification when you need it.
All the code
Every solution, every benchmark script, every Playground link is in the GitHub repo:
What's next?
This is the first video in AI Showdown: MuleSoft Edition (2026) — an ongoing series comparing AI coding tools on the same MuleSoft and DataWeave challenges. As I work through more Advent of Code days (and test more AIs), I'll keep posting the results here.
🎯 What AI tool should I compare next? Drop a comment on the YouTube video or reply to this post.
🔔 Subscribe so you don't miss the next round: youtube.com/prostdev
Looking for the previous series? Check out "Adventures in MuleSoft + AI" on the channel for last year's explorations.
Comments