I would like to hear if any of you are using different app for API testing than Postman.
I’m not telling that Postman is bad, but maybe there’s all that I should check out. Recently I tried RapidApi and even tho the app is kinda cool I missed few options and went back to Postman for now.
The one thing I find difficult in Insomnia is making the auth common across a group of requests. I end up duplicating existing requests which doesn't help if I need to update the process at all. Is there a way to use common auth routines yet?
Seconding Insomnia. Sleeker interface imo, only thing it’s lacking in feature parity afaik is the cookie sniffer, but you can grab what you need in postman or js console and then plug it into insomnia np.
Insomnia, or if you really love the command line and dont need to document or save your API requests, curl (don't recommend this for anything beyond simple testing).
Insomnia is great and has an easy, simple interface. But I feel like creating complex collections with different environments is a lot simpler with postman
I'm the maintainer of HTTP Toolkit - it's not a Postman alternative (it's an open source project focused on intercepting & debugging traffic, not sending it) but I'm actually working on building a UI for exactly this right now, so this thread is perfectly timed!
Is there anything that any of you really love or hate about any of the tools suggested here?
What core features beyond just "edit method+URL+headers+body, send, view the response status+headers+body" are essential to you?
Anything you wish these tools could do better?
I'm planning on taking the client functionality live within a few weeks max, so if you want to help your perfect Postman alternative come to life now's the moment 😁
For a given project, maintain a list of HTTP requests I often need to send
Some way to save responses, so I can compare how the server does respond to how it previously responded.
Both need to be shared with my colleagues. And this must not share any auth credentials/tokens/etc that are in every request (I want that do be done separately with something more secure).
Either one isn't really the full picture - you'll ned to combine it with other extensions - such as a good JSON language extension (which will give you syntax highlighting, error checking, code folding/etc.
The most important extension is CoPilot. That's the killer feature which makes Visual Studio Code vastly better than Postman.
Thunder is very similar to Postman. Not much to say other than it works well, it's free, millions of people use it.
It's not really my cup of tea, but I do think it's better than Postman because you can use your own version control servers to collaborate with colleagues, which is generally better (and cheaper) than Postman's collaboration service in my opinion (you get diffs, code review, pull requests, history, etc etc for all your most important API tests).
Personally I prefer REST Client (also free, and has even more users than Thunder).
REST Client is really simple. It adds a new "HTTP" text file type. You simply type a HTTP request into the file and hit a hotkey (or click a button) to execute the request. And it shows you the response. Easy.
HTTP requests and responses are just plain text, and you can simply save those as files in your project. REST Client also has basic support for variables, API credentials, etc. Not quite as user friendly as Postman or Thunder Client, but it makes up for that by being straightforward and flexible.
CoPilot Chat, works with both, but having everything in plain text gives it more control over REST Client than Thunder Clinet you can write (and edit) your requests with a series of simple plain english prompts. E.g. "JSON request with a blog post body" will give you:
POST https://example.com/blog/posts
Content-Type: application/json
{
"title": "My First Blog Post",
"body": "This is the content of my first blog post. It's not very long, but it's a start!",
"author": "John Doe",
"tags": ["blogging", "first post"]
}
You might follow that up with "Add a UUID" or "Add a JWT auth header".
Copilot can answer questions too - e.g. "How do I unsubscribe a user with the Mailchimp API?" They use the "HTTP PATCH" request type - WTF.
As it's a web app, and a minor downside is that you have to have to install a browser extension (open-source as well) or use a proxy in order to aviod CORS issues.
I completely stopped using all those clients. We now just store the requests alongside the code in an http file and use the built in IntelliJ HTTP Client to make the call. No need for a separate program, integrates with your code, you can save responses to make sure they don't change, it's all stored in git. There's a ton of benefits and not many downsides.
Once I learned about http files I never went back. It's so easy to share and use, I primarily use JetBrains but there are extensions for VSCode that do the same thing that I have used as well.
just create a new file of type HTTP Request, click on the *Examples dropdown in the top right, choose the type of thing you want to do, copy one of the examples, and then paste it into the .http file you created. Then hit the play button! dead simple!
xh is a rust implementation of httpie. They're going for full parity, and works really well for what I need it for so far
You can also read input from a file. Which IMO makes GUI API testing seem silly.
POST https://example.org/api/tests
{
"id": "4568",
"evaluate": true
}
HTTP 200
[Asserts]
header "X-Frame-Options" == "SAMEORIGIN"
jsonpath "$.status" == "RUNNING" # Check the status code
jsonpath "$.tests" count == 25 # Check the number of items
jsonpath "$.id" matches /\d{4}/ # Check the format of the id
It's very similar to what JetBrains has and you can easily translate between the two (assuming you aren't using assertions or any Hurl-specific features), but not exactly the same syntax.
I tend to go with Hurl because it's self contained and you can do things like throw it in your CI builds.
If you’re on a Mac, I recommend the RapidAPI native HTTP client. It used to be called Paw and it recently got acquired by the RapidAPI team but it hasn’t changed much and still works pretty well IMO. I’ve been using it for years to test out APIs and i like it better than Postman.
Surprised how little love this option is getting in the comments. Not only will swagger be generated for you from your openapi spec, it has a clean fast UI and shared auth.
I also have been using httpie for a few years - it is really great.
Recently I have started using nushell which has a similar module builtin: https://www.nushell.sh/commands/docs/http_get.html
Combined with rest of the nicities in nushell its a pretty good cli experience.
I'm saying that Postman is bad. maybe not in terms of functionality, but damn if it doesn't run like a slug on my work computer, which is just fine handling a dozen Visual Studio and Rider instances. It seems like it works perfectly for about 5 minutes and then goes to crap.
So yeah, I'd be interested in an alternative too. I only really use it for basic functionality (creating, sharing, and running collections of requests with configurable parameters).
Same for me, I'll notice my computer is a bit loud, realise I forgot to close postman and it's just sitting there, doing nothing, minimised, and my 12 core CPU is sat at 20%.
I close postman, within seconds the fans spin down.
I've tried a few alternatives but the rest of the team use postman and we've got shared collections and pretty extensive pre-request scripts and nothing else I've tried really fits the bill.
There is always the web version of postman. It can make localhost calls if you install their desktop agent. Might have better memory management somehow? I dunno.
I find postman to be too complex, too much config all over the place. It's also difficult to share with others, it would be much better if it could store the settings in a file that could then be checked into git. That way everyone on the project would have the requests and could add and modify them as the server changes. Does any client like this exist?
It seems about the same. The only real improvement that I’ve noticed, and maybe I just had it set up wrong, is that it can now handle high resolutions. The first time I used it the text was impossible to read. It has a lot of really cool features, but it’s not the friendliest software.
I see that Hurl is much alike the Jetbrains HTTP Client. maybe I could give that one another try or the Hurl as this way of writing requests is more “developer-like” and looks neat