Scalpel Redirects vs Redirect Path
Two local-first redirect inspectors. Redirect Path is the established favourite; Scalpel goes deeper on the chain itself, with history, hint chips, and exports.
Redirect Path is made by Ayima. Facts checked against public sources on 19 July 2026, and linked at the end. Where a source is silent, the table says "Not documented".
Redirect Path, by the SEO agency Ayima, is one of the most-installed redirect tools on the Chrome Web Store, with roughly 300,000 users and a 4.3-star rating. It flags 301, 302, 404, and 500 responses plus meta and JavaScript redirects as you browse, and shows the HTTP headers and server IP behind them. It's fast, trusted, and free.
Scalpel Redirects covers the same ground and then focuses on the chain itself: the exact hops your browser followed, every header per hop, a per-tab history so a client-side redirect can't wipe the trail, and structured exports. Here's an honest, sourced comparison. Where Ayima's public pages don't state something, we say so rather than guess.
Feature by feature
| Feature | Scalpel Redirects | Redirect Path |
|---|---|---|
| HTTP status codes | Every hop's status in the chain, with a verdict line. | Flags 301, 302, 404, and 500 on the page you're viewing. |
| Meta and JavaScript redirects | Detected, labelled distinctly, and linked to the server chain before them. | Detected and flagged alongside server redirects. |
| Full response headers per hop | Every header, in original order, for each hop. | Shows HTTP headers and the server IP for the request. |
| Per-hop SEO hint chips | HSTS, X-Robots-Tag, canonical header, Cache-Control, server, IP, and cache state, called out per hop. | Not documented as labelled hints; raw headers are shown. |
| Per-tab navigation history | Keeps the last 20 navigations per tab so client redirects don't erase the chain. | Not documented. |
| Wasted-hop verdict | Flags collapsible hops, like a 301 to 301 or an http to https to www triple hop. | Not documented. |
| Exports | Any chain as JSON, Markdown, or CSV, to copy or download. | Copy to clipboard; structured file export not documented. |
| Cloud or AI feature | None. There's no cloud path of any kind. | Optional "Ask Ayima AI" sends the chain or error to Ayima's AI service when you use it. |
| Maturity | New, coming to the Chrome Web Store. | Established, around 300,000 users, 4.3 stars (version 4). |
What happens to your data
The part that's easy to miss. This is where the two tools differ most, and every claim here is drawn from the sources below.
| Feature | Scalpel Redirects | Redirect Path |
|---|---|---|
| Where analysis runs | In your browser. It observes navigation and never makes its own requests. | In your browser. Ayima states "all analysis stays in your browser" with "nothing sent to third parties or Ayima". |
| Optional cloud feature | None. | The "Ask Ayima AI" helper sends data to Ayima only when you choose to use it. |
| Data sold or shared | No data leaves your machine, so there's nothing to sell. | The store listing declares data is not sold and not used for unrelated purposes. |
| Account | Not required. | Not required. |
Which should you choose?
Pick Scalpel Redirects if
You want the real chain your browser followed, a history strip that survives client-side redirects, per-hop SEO hints, and JSON or CSV you can diff in CI after a migration.
Pick Redirect Path if
You want the established, battle-tested tool with a huge user base, a quick header and status view on every page, and an optional AI helper to explain what you're seeing.
Our take
Redirect Path earned its 300,000 installs. If you want a proven header-and-status viewer that just works, it's a safe pick, and Ayima is clear that analysis stays local unless you opt into the AI helper.
Scalpel Redirects is for when the chain is the thing you care about: keeping the trail when a JavaScript redirect fires, reading per-hop cache and robots hints at a glance, and exporting a chain to compare before and after a launch. And it has no cloud path at all, optional or otherwise.