Best Hoppscotch CLI Alternatives for API Testing

The Hoppscotch CLI is a free, open-source way to run API collections from a terminal. If you already use Hoppscotch on the web or desktop, hopp test lets you run the same requests in CI without adding a paid runner.

Try Apidog today

But Hoppscotch CLI is intentionally focused: it runs collections and reports results. It does not design APIs, mock endpoints, generate documentation, or manage API resources as code. If your team needs more than executing exported JSON—or if the Node.js v22 requirement creates CI friction—it is worth comparing alternatives.

What the Hoppscotch CLI actually does

Hoppscotch CLI is published as the npm package @hoppscotch/cli.

Install it globally:

npm i -g @hoppscotch/cli

Current versions require Node.js v22 or newer. If your CI images are pinned to Node 20, you need to stay on CLI v0.26.0 or add separate Node version management for this job.

The main command is hopp test. Point it at a local collection and environment file:

hopp test ./collection.json -e ./environment.json -d 500

For Hoppscotch Cloud or a self-hosted instance, run by collection ID and pass credentials:

hopp test <collection-id> \
  -e <environment-id> \
  --token <access_token> \
  --server <server-url>

In practice, Hoppscotch CLI can:

• Run requests in collection order
• Execute pre-request scripts
• Execute test scripts using pw.test() and pw.expect()
• Validate responses
• Exit with a non-zero status when assertions fail
• Generate JUnit XML with --reporter-junit <path>
• Run data-driven tests with --iteration-count and --iteration-data <csv>

That makes it a capable free collection runner. The limitation is scope: it starts after your API and collections already exist.

Why teams look for a hopp test alternative

Most teams do not replace Hoppscotch CLI because it fails at running collections. They replace it because the workflow around it becomes too narrow.

Common friction points:

• It is only a collection runner. API design, mocking, docs, and schema management live elsewhere.
• You need exported files or cloud IDs. The CLI consumes collections and environments; it does not provide a full design or spec workflow.
• Node.js v22 may not match your CI baseline. Shared build images often lag behind the latest Node release.
• There is no full spec-as-code layer. You cannot manage endpoints, schemas, branches, or API changes from the CLI itself.

If all you need is a free runner, Hoppscotch CLI is still a good option. If you want a broader API workflow, compare the tools below.

1. Apidog CLI: best all-in-one alternative

Apidog is an API platform for design, debugging, mocking, documentation, and testing. Apidog CLI brings testing and API resource management into the terminal, which makes it a stronger fit when you want more than a standalone runner.

Use apidog run to execute test scenarios and collections from the command line or CI. It supports:

• Environments with -e
• Data-driven testing with CSV or JSON datasets using -d
• CLI, HTML, and JSON reports
• Cloud report upload with --upload-report
• API resource management from the CLI
• OpenAPI import
• Endpoint, schema, environment, branch, and merge request workflows

Example CI-style test run:

apidog run <scenario-or-collection-id> \
  -e <environment-id> \
  -d ./data.csv

Use Apidog CLI when you want your API definition, test scenarios, documentation, and mocks to stay in one system instead of exporting JSON between tools.

Important scope note: Apidog validates specs on import, but it does not provide a standalone OpenAPI linter or split / join / bundle commands. If your main requirement is Spectral-style OpenAPI linting in CI, look at inso or Redocly CLI.

Pros

• One platform for API design, mock, docs, debugging, and tests
• Data-driven runs with CSV or JSON
• CLI, HTML, JSON, and cloud reports
• Resource-as-code workflows for endpoints, schemas, branches, and merge requests
• Direct OpenAPI import

Cons

• No standalone spec-linter command
• More platform than you need if you only run a single exported collection

For deeper migration details, read:

• Apidog CLI vs Hoppscotch CLI
• Migrate Hoppscotch CLI to Apidog CLI
• Apidog CLI complete guide
• Download Apidog

2. Newman: the Postman runner

Newman is Postman’s official command-line collection runner. If your team already uses Postman, this is usually the lowest-friction option.

Basic usage:

newman run collection.json -e env.json -r cli,json

Typical CI usage with JUnit output:

newman run collection.json \
  -e env.json \
  -r cli,junit \
  --reporter-junit-export ./reports/newman.xml

Newman supports multiple reporters, data files for iterations, and stable exit codes for CI pipelines.

Pros

• Mature and widely documented
• Strong Postman collection compatibility
• Flexible reporter ecosystem
• Good support for data-driven iterations

Cons

• Runner only; no API design, mock, or docs layer
• Tied to the Postman collection format and scripting model
• Still depends on exported JSON collections and environments

For a direct comparison, see Apidog CLI vs Newman.

3. inso: Insomnia CLI by Kong

inso is the command-line tool for Kong’s Insomnia client. Its key advantage over Hoppscotch CLI is OpenAPI linting through Spectral.

Example commands:

inso run test "My Test Suite" --env "Staging"
inso lint spec "My API Design"
inso export spec "My API Design" --output output.yaml

inso reads from a .insomnia directory created by Insomnia Git Sync, or from the local app data directory. You reference specs and test suites by name.

Install options include Homebrew and Docker:

brew install inso

docker pull kong/inso:latest

Pros

• OpenAPI linting via Spectral
• Runs tests and collections
• Exports specs from the terminal
• Brew and Docker install paths

Cons

• Name-based resource references can be brittle in scripts
• Insomnia 8 introduced a required cloud/login account in 2023, which caused user backlash and migration concerns

Related comparisons:

• Apidog vs Insomnia
• Best Insomnia app alternatives
• Apidog CLI vs inso

4. Step CI: open-source API testing in YAML

Step CI defines API tests in declarative YAML. Instead of writing JavaScript test scripts, you describe requests and expected responses.

Run a workflow:

npx stepci run workflow.yml

A simple workflow might look like this:

version: "1.1"

name: API health check

tests:
  example:
    steps:
      - name: Check health endpoint
        http:
          url: https://api.example.com/health
          method: GET
          check:
            status: 200

Step CI supports REST, GraphQL, and gRPC, which gives it broader protocol coverage than many collection runners.

Pros

• Declarative YAML that works well in version control
• REST, GraphQL, and gRPC support
• No GUI dependency
• Tests live directly in your repository

Cons

• Smaller ecosystem than Newman or Postman-based tooling
• No API design, mock, or documentation layer
• You write tests manually instead of recording them from a client

Step CI is a good fit when you want git-native API tests and do not need a full API platform UI.

5. Hurl: plain-text HTTP testing

Hurl runs HTTP requests written in plain text and asserts on the responses. It is built on libcurl and works well for fast smoke tests, health checks, and simple contract checks.

Example health.hurl file:

GET https://api.example.com/health
HTTP 200
[Asserts]
jsonpath "$.status" == "up"

Run it:

hurl --test health.hurl

Use Hurl when you want tests that are easy to read in pull requests and do not require JSON collection files.

Pros

• Lightweight and fast
• Plain-text files are easy to review
• Good for smoke tests and health checks
• No Node.js dependency

Cons

• Lower-level than a full test framework
• No design, mock, or documentation features
• Less convenient for complex chained or data-driven scenarios

Hurl is not trying to be an API platform. It is best when you need quick, readable HTTP checks in CI.

Comparison table

Tool	License	Core focus	Data-driven	Spec linting	Design/mock/docs	Report formats
Apidog CLI	Commercial (free tier)	Full platform + CLI testing	Yes (CSV/JSON)	No (validates on import)	Yes	CLI, HTML, JSON, cloud
Hoppscotch CLI	Open source	Collection runner	Yes (CSV iterations)	No	No	CLI, JUnit
Newman	Open source	Postman runner	Yes (data files)	No	No	CLI, JSON, JUnit, HTML
inso	Open source	Insomnia runner + linter	Limited	Yes (Spectral)	Partial (design docs)	CLI, JUnit
Step CI	Open source	YAML API tests	Yes	No	No	CLI, JUnit
Hurl	Open source	Plain-text HTTP tests	Via templating	No	No	CLI, JUnit, HTML

How to choose

Use this decision path:

• You want one workflow for design, mock, docs, and testing: choose Apidog CLI.
• Your team already uses Postman: choose Newman.
• You need OpenAPI linting in CI: choose inso.
• You want tests stored as readable files in Git: choose Step CI or Hurl.
• You only want to avoid Node.js v22: Newman, Step CI, inso, and Hurl avoid the current Hoppscotch CLI requirement.

If the problem is not just Node.js versioning but the ceiling of a collection-runner workflow, start with an integrated API platform.

Useful next reads:

• Apidog CLI vs Postman CLI
• Apidog CLI CI/CD pipeline
• Apidog CLI test reports

FAQ

Is the Hoppscotch CLI free?

Yes. @hoppscotch/cli is open source and free to use. It runs collections, executes scripts, validates responses, and can emit JUnit reports.

What is the simplest Hoppscotch CLI alternative if I do not want Node.js v22?

Hurl is the simplest if you want no Node.js dependency because it runs as a single binary. inso can be installed with Homebrew or Docker. Step CI runs through npx but is not pinned to Node.js v22 in the same way as the current Hoppscotch CLI.

Can I move existing Hoppscotch collections to another tool?

Yes. Most API tools can work with exported collections or OpenAPI definitions. For Apidog, use the migrate Hoppscotch CLI to Apidog CLI guide.

Does Apidog CLI lint OpenAPI specs like inso?

No. Apidog validates specs on import, but it does not provide a standalone OpenAPI linter command. If CI linting is mandatory, pair Apidog with inso or compare linting-focused tools in Apidog CLI vs Redocly CLI.

Which alternative is best for CI?

All tools listed here can fail a pipeline with a non-zero exit code. Choose based on the workflow you need:

• Pure collection runs: Newman
• Lightweight smoke checks: Hurl
• YAML tests in Git: Step CI
• OpenAPI linting gates: inso
• Design, mock, docs, and tests in one workflow: Apidog CLI

The Hoppscotch CLI does its job well: running collections. If that is all you need, keep using it. If you want to collapse API design, mocking, documentation, and testing into one workflow, start with the Apidog CLI complete guide, then download Apidog and run your first scenario.