Visual to build.
Durable to run.
A failed scenario leaves you to work out what did and did not happen. Spojit checkpoints every step, resumes where it left off, never repeats an action on retry, and shows you exactly what ran.
Why teams pick Spojit over Make
Agent-first architecture
Agents that plan, call tools, and adapt in a loop are the core of the platform, not a newer agent feature layered onto a module-based scenario builder.
Connect any API
No waiting for a module. Point Miraxa at the vendor documentation and it builds the integration.
Billed by time, not per module
You pay for execution time and AI credits, not a charge on every module run, so a complex scenario does not multiply your bill. Direct Mode steps use no AI credits.
Durable execution
Runs checkpoint their state and resume after a crash, so long scenarios do not lose their place.
Parallel branches with join
Run independent paths at the same time and merge them back in one run. Make routers process routes one after another.
Build by chatting
Describe what you want and Miraxa builds it, instead of assembling the scenario by hand.
Spojit vs Make
Reflects publicly available information as of June 2026. Make is a trademark of its owner; its features and pricing may have changed since. Check their site for the latest.
Which one fits you
Both can automate your stack. Here is the honest call.
Choose Spojit if you want AI agents at the core with durable, parallel workflows, not AI features added to a module-based scenario builder.
- You want agents at the core, with a visual canvas and build-by-chat
- You need parallel branches that join, not sequential routers
- The credits-per-module model is hard to predict for you
- You need a tool Make has no module for
Make still fits
- You mainly connect apps that already have a module
- Your scenarios are high-volume and mostly without AI
Every run, on the same guarantees
Ready for agents, not just modules?
Start free and build a visual workflow with real AI agents and predictable cost. No card needed.