Loading the catalogue…
Loading the catalogue…
Z.ai's flagship open-weights reasoning and agentic-coding model, with a 1M-token context window and MIT-licensed weights.
Overview. GLM-5.2 is Z.ai's (formerly Zhipu AI) flagship open-weights reasoning and agentic-coding model, built as a 744B-total-parameter mixture-of-experts network with 40B active parameters per token. It ships under an MIT licence with a 1,048,576-token context window, making it a fit for developers who need very long-context reasoning or agentic coding workflows and want the option to self-host the weights rather than depend solely on a hosted endpoint.
Key strengths. Artificial Analysis has named GLM-5.2 the leading open-weights model on its Intelligence Index, and its domain profile skews heavily toward code, consistent with Z.ai's own framing of the model as an agentic-coding flagship. It runs as a reasoning model with selectable effort levels (high and xhigh), giving developers a visible reasoning trace they can tune for harder multi-step problems. The 1M-token context window is large enough to hold sizeable codebases or long agent transcripts in a single call.
When to use it. Reach for GLM-5.2 on complex, multi-step coding or agentic tasks where you want an extended reasoning trace and can tolerate slower, batch-style turnaround rather than snappy chat latency. It's a strong fit when a task needs to reference very large amounts of context in one pass — think large repositories, long documents, or extended tool-use transcripts — and where self-hosting the open weights under MIT terms is valuable for control over the inference environment.
Limitations. Output is capped at 128K tokens per response, and the model is text-only — there's no vision or audio input or output support. Its reasoning-driven response style falls into a batch latency class, so it isn't the right choice for latency-sensitive interactive chat. No official training-data cutoff date has been published by Z.ai.
Sovereignty note. GLM-5.2 is created by Z.ai (Zhipu AI), a China-based developer, not by Mistral as currently recorded in this catalogue entry — that attribution needs correcting before publishing, since it changes the country-of-origin and licensing-policy facts shown to customers. Because the weights are openly licensed under MIT, the model can be self-hosted in an environment of your choosing for full control over where inference data resides, independent of any hosted provider's policies.
| Inference Provider | Sovereignty | Runs in | In / out per 1M | Status | Pin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L3 | €1.80 / 5.50 | Online | |||
| L3 | €2.00 / 5.20 | Online | |||
| L1 | €1.08 / 3.77 | Online | |||
| L0 | €0.67 / 2.15 | Online | |||
| L0 | €1.26 / 3.95 | Online |
17 use cases classified by the curator. The note says why.
1M+ token context allows full-corpus grounding for answer generation without aggressive retrieval truncation.
1,048,576-token context window allows ingestion of entire large documents or document sets in a single pass, a strong architectural fit for document Q&A.
Extremely large context window (1M+ tokens) enables holding many papers/sources simultaneously, well suited to literature review workflows.
Context window over 1M tokens supports synthesizing across many long source documents without chunking, a key requirement for research synthesis.
Massive context window supports summarising very long documents or transcripts end-to-end in one call.
Context capacity supports large audit trails and long log files, though no domain-specific validation is available.
1M+ token context supports very long-form generation and continuity, but no writing-quality benchmarks are documented.
Context window comfortably fits long meeting transcripts, but lacking any curated benchmark evidence keeps this at acceptable rather than strong.
Large context supports aggregating and organising extensive note sets, though no specific capability signal beyond context size is available.
Large context window can hold full regulatory texts, but no extraction-specific capability or benchmark is documented, so confidence is moderate.
Large context aids handling long candidate sets, but no retrieval or embedding-specific capability is flagged.
No tool-calling capability flagged, which is required for agentic coding workflows involving execution and iteration.
No agentic or tool-use capability is documented, making browser automation unsupported for this variant.
No vision/OCR capability is documented, so this model cannot process image-based document scans.
Capabilities list shows none flagged, including no function-calling support, ruling out reliable use in function-calling applications.
No vision capability is flagged for this model, ruling out image-based Q&A.
No tool-calling or function-calling capability is flagged for this model, a core requirement for tool orchestration.
Sourced numbers, not our own evaluations. Percentiles are against the whole Stav catalogue.
Computed from aa-intelligence-index, gpqa-diamond, aa-engineering-index, aa-coding-index, livecodebench, terminal-bench-v4, ifbench, aa-lcr.
curl https://api.stav.ai/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $STAV_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "zai-org/glm-5-2",
"reasoning_effort": "high",
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello!"}]
}'→ X-Stav-Request-Id · X-Stav-Model · X-Stav-Provider → X-Stav-Sovereignty-Level — the rung the request was served at