Heeler vs Semgrep
Heeler vs Semgrep
Agentic Development Security, built for the AI SDLC and modeled around the service — versus a static-analysis platform with a user-writable rule engine. On the code layer this is close; Heeler separates on one context engine spanning code to cloud and validated remediation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Runtime context and a proven fix, not just rules you can write.
Heeler runs one context engine across code, dependencies, runtime, and cloud — assembling six dimensions of context from three read-only connections, then prioritizing findings by what's actually reachable and exposed and shipping remediation that edits the code and proves it green in your CI.
Semgrep is a static-analysis platform — Code (SAST), Supply Chain (SCA + reachability), Secrets, and Guardian for AI-generated code — distinguished by a transparent, user-writable rule engine and a large public Registry.
Close on the code layer. Heeler separates on two axes Semgrep lacks natively — runtime context (APIs, authentication, internet exposure) driving reachability-based prioritization, and remediation that makes the code change and proves it in CI.
THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE
One context engine code-to-cloud with a proven fix, not just detection rules you own.
Heeler runs one context engine across code, dependencies, runtime, and cloud — ranking by real reachability and exposure and proving each fix green in your CI. Semgrep is a static-analysis platform with a user-writable rule engine and a Code/Supply Chain/Secrets/Guardian suite — but no native application cloud/runtime context.
SEMGREP
Static analysis, rules you own
Detect precisely; put the rule engine in developers' hands.
- →Semgrep Code (SAST, cross-function default + optional cross-file), Supply Chain (SCA + reachability), Secrets (semantic + validated), Guardian for AI-generated code
- →A transparent, user-writable pattern + taint DSL, interactive editor, and a large public rule Registry
- →No native application cloud/runtime, API, authentication, or internet-exposure model — runtime only via Wiz (push) or Sysdig (ingest) integrations
- →Remediation: AI Autofix draft PRs (beta), Rule-defined fixes, Multimodal suggestions; Upgrade guidance for JS/Python
HEELER
Context-engine native, service-modeled
Six dimensions of context, one model, a validated fix at the end.
- →One context engine assembles six dimensions — code, cloud/runtime, business, ownership, threat, agent — from three read-only connections, sensor-less
- →A real runtime layer: services fingerprinted to the exact commit, API endpoints + schemas enumerated, per-endpoint authentication modeled, internet exposure detected
- →Embeds in coding agents via MCP + skills to steer generation, and vets the skill/instruction files they load
- →Remediation makes the change and proves it: edits first-party code, builds/tests in your CI, repairs until green, opens a merge-ready PR (human review, no auto-merge) — SCA and SAST — closing only on a runtime-verified fix
VERDICT FRAMEWORK
Side-by-side, with a verdict per row.
Five states. Heeler-leaning where Heeler advances; explicit when Semgrep leads; honest about parity.
● Heeler advantage
Heeler delivers a capability Semgrep does not, or in a fundamentally different way that changes outcomes.
◐ Heeler edge
Both deliver the capability. Heeler's implementation is materially better on a verifiable dimension.
✓ Parity
Both products deliver the capability comparably.
◑ Semgrep edge
Both deliver the capability. Semgrep's implementation leads on a verifiable dimension.
○ Semgrep advantage
Explicit signal that Semgrep leads on this row.
Scorecard — 20 capabilities, scoped to code security
| Section | ● Heeler advantage | ◐ Heeler edge | ✓ Parity | ◑ Semgrep edge | ○ Semgrep advantage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prevent | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Fix | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Operate | 4 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 0 |
Capability Overview
| Capability | Heeler | Semgrep | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prevent · stop risk before and as it enters | An MCP server + auto-loaded Agent Skills inject org-specific context (vuln details, safe upgrade paths, package impact, runtime exposure, service policy) into the agent's reasoning at the moment of decision — steering secure generation before code exists, across Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, Windsurf, Codex. | Semgrep Guardian bundles an MCP server, hooks, and skills into one install, scans every file an agent generates with Code / Supply Chain / Secrets, and prompts the agent to regenerate until scans come back clean — across Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, Codex, Kiro, and Windsurf. A comparable capability at generation time. | ✓ Parity |
| Agent security & governance | A skill catalog vets every skill/instruction file (skills.md, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, .cursorrules, mcp.json) for malicious content with a 0–100 safety score and a benign/suspicious/malicious verdict (static pass + isolated LLM judge), mapped to MITRE ATLAS + OWASP LLM Top 10, gate-able in the pipeline. | Guardian scans the code an agent writes and can act on the agent via hooks, but Semgrep does not statically vet the agent's own skill/instruction files (CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, mcp.json, AGENTS.md) for malicious or poisoned content — the emerging agent supply-chain surface. It secures the output, not the instructions. | ◐ Heeler edge |
| Custom rule engine & rule registry | Ships a curated detection set and lets you tune true-positive rate; findings are explainable with the matching pattern shown. Detection logic is Heeler-authored rather than an open, user-writable rule language with a public community registry. | Semgrep provides a transparent, developer-writable pattern + taint DSL, an interactive editor/playground, and a large public rule Registry the community contributes to. If you want to own and version your detection logic, this is a Semgrep advantage. | ◑ Semgrep edge |
| PR guardrails & policy enforcement | Block / Warn / Observe with plain-English rule authoring (no YAML or Rego); scoped by global, repo, service runtime context, and branch; diff-only on net-new violations so inherited debt isn't penalized; a full guardrail catalog — compromised/malicious dependency, minimum package-age, unpinned dependency and unpinned Action, secrets with live validation, license, SAST severity, and SLO guardrails that block PRs against overdue repos; multi-SCM native checks; and an in-PR Fix Now that triggers a validated (CI-repaired) remediation PR. | Unified Policies split detection from remediation — choose rules, then Monitor / Comment / Block per project — with Jira, Slack, and PR/MR comment actions. Rule-centric, but scoping isn't runtime-context-aware, the block decision is keyed to rule/severity rather than a broad supply-chain/secrets/SLO catalog, and there's no in-PR one-click validated remediation. | ◐ Heeler edge |
| Software supply-chain prevention (deps) | A layered, proactive program: block malicious/compromised on sight, typosquat detection, minimum package-age cooldown (blocks freshly published malware before advisories exist), unpinned-dependency and unpinned-Action detection, dependency-hygiene scoring, and posture management that validates pinning and minimum-release-age controls are actually configured across ecosystems (npm, pnpm, Yarn, Bun, uv, pip, Deno) — enforced at the PR and continuously re-evaluated. | Malicious-dependency detection (MAL badge, critical severity, block-on-policy) across nine ecosystems, drawing on GitHub Advisories, OSV, and Semgrep's own security research with sub-hourly advisory ingestion. Advisory-based malware detection; the broader preventive guardrail set (typosquat, unpinned, cooldown-as-policy, posture validation of missing controls) is not a first-class program. | ◐ Heeler edge |
| Fix · resolve findings — code and dependencies | ... |