Use case
Security testers or backend engineers checking their own APIs for authorization or injection flaws before a release need to capture and replay requests and inspect responses to confirm whether a vulnerability is real.
Local proxy tools such as Burp Suite and Caido, or manually crafting requests with curl or Postman.
Local proxy tools such as Burp Suite and Caido require installing a client and configuring proxies and certificates, a high bar for people who rarely do security testing, so the API check is often skipped or deferred.
xOcto's call
Demand is evidenced
The trend is that security testing tools are removing the environment-setup step toward out-of-the-box use; an entry point is small teams with no dedicated security role that only check APIs before a release, selling a per-run or per-project check result rather than tool seats.
Reason to use it
Why users would choose it
Inference: it removes the install-and-proxy step so users can open a page, send requests to a target API and read responses, which is why developers who need an occasional API check without setting up an environment would try it; public material offers no retention or payment evidence, so long-term workflow adoption cannot be confirmed.
Where the easy answer breaks down
The tension worth following
An English validation note will follow from the public evidence.
If this is your job
Worth trying. Inference: it removes the install-and-proxy step so users can open a page, send requests to a target API and read responses, which is why developers who need an occasional API check without setting up an environment would try it; public material offers no retention or payment evidence, so long-term workflow adoption cannot be confirmed.
Entry and what to borrow
The trend is that security testing tools are removing the environment-setup step toward out-of-the-box use; an entry point is small teams with no dedicated security role that only check APIs before a release, selling a per-run or per-project check result rather than tool seats.