A practical tool evaluation · October 1, 2026

UXXU vs LikeC4

Choose UXXU when visual authoring in a shared workspace fits the team. Prefer LikeC4 when the architecture source should live in Git and the team wants to own its publishing workflow.

Written by UXXU. This is a workflow comparison based on product documentation, not an independent benchmark. Review LikeC4’s own documentation for current capabilities and terms.

Start with how the model will be maintained

LikeC4: Open-source architecture DSL with interactive views and documentation embeds. Teams that want architecture definitions in Git and custom documentation integration.

UXXU: model visually in a shared workspace, reuse architecture elements across views, and connect a compatible AI client through MCP. The free plan lets one user evaluate up to 400 architecture items. Review current pricing.

Run this comparison on a checkout system

Create two views over one definition, rename a service and review the Git diff. Then publish an interactive view in the documentation your team already uses. LikeC4 also advertises MCP access, so compare the agent workflow directly.

1. Identify the customer, commerce system and external payment provider in a context view.
2. Open the container view and trace a checkout request from the frontend to its data store.
3. Rename the payment provider. Record which related views change and which steps are manual.
4. Share the result with a colleague who did not create it. Ask them to locate the boundary and explain the payment dependency.
5. Compare the cost, permissions and maintenance effort for your actual team.

Take the same example to both tools

Download a portable checkout model and use its names, boundaries and relationships as a common specification. The file uses Structurizr DSL; tools with another input format require translation. It is not a universal import.

Keep a published view aligned with its source

Translate the checkout specification into LikeC4’s own DSL; the supplied Structurizr file is not a LikeC4 import. Define the provider once, create two views and publish them using your documentation workflow. Build the equivalent views in UXXU and embed a public model only if that architecture is intended to be public.

Rename the shared provider

Both views resolve the same element. A name change reaches both without creating another provider or losing relationships.

Ship the documentation update

A reader sees the new name at the published URL. Record build, deployment and cache steps, including failures that could leave an old view visible.

Query the model with an agent

The agent identifies the provider and its callers from retrieved facts. Record configuration effort and how you establish which model revision the answer describes.

Download the evaluation worksheet and record observations for each tool. It contains pass criteria and blank evidence fields, not preassigned scores.

Make the decision with the maintainers

LikeC4 fits an architecture-as-code workflow with Git ownership and custom documentation integration. UXXU fits teams that want authors to edit a hosted visual model. Both offer interactive views and MCP workflows; make publishing ownership, review habits and reader access the deciding tests.

Give the people who will own the architecture the same editing task. Record how they review a proposed change, how a reader finds detail and what it takes to keep documentation current. Choose the workflow that fits that recurring work.