← Back home · Compare
StxScript vs Clarinet
Stacks test + dev environment for Clarity contracts.
Clarinet runs Clarity, simulates the Stacks chain locally, and orchestrates contract tests. StxScript produces Clarity. The two compose: use StxScript as your source language, build to .clar, and let Clarinet drive your test and devnet flow.
| Feature | StxScript | Clarinet | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| What it is | Source-to-Clarity transpiler | Clarity dev environment / test runner | Comparable |
| Replaces the other? | No | No | Comparable |
| Editing experience | TS-style syntax + LSP | Native Clarity editing | StxScript |
| Local test runner | stxscript test (contract-level) | Clarinet console + simnet | Clarinet |
| Simulating block height / tx-sender | Not in scope | First-class | Clarinet |
| Type checking pre-deploy | Yes, in the transpiler | Yes, on contract load | Comparable |
| Use together? | Yes — build to .clar, then Clarinet runs the suite | Yes — same answer | Comparable |
| Project scaffolding | stxscript new (basic/token/nft/defi) | clarinet new | Comparable |
Pick StxScript when
- ▸You want a TypeScript-flavored source language above Clarinet
- ▸You like StxScript decorators and type system for authoring
- ▸You want stxscript fmt / lint / check while editing, on top of Clarinet for execution
- ▸You prefer stxscript test for unit contracts and Clarinet for end-to-end simulation
Pick Clarinet when
- ▸You already have a Clarinet project and refactoring to a transpiler is not worth it
- ▸Your test suite leans heavily on Clarinet console and simnet features
- ▸You want exactly one tool in your contract toolchain
Still deciding?
The two tools are not in conflict. Most teams that adopt StxScript still keep the rest of their Stacks toolchain. Try one file in StxScript; ship the rest of the project unchanged.