c15t

Pros: The prompt-based installation is useful if you already use an AI coding agent. It gives the agent instructions for setting up consent in your project, including connecting tracking scripts and checking the flow. That cuts down on the initial configuration work.

The React and Next.js support is another plus. You can style the banner to match your application, use the supplied components or build your own interface. Integrations for tools such as Google Analytics and Meta Pixel mean there’s less vendor-specific code to maintain.

The “compliance as code” approach has a practical benefit: consent settings sit alongside your application code. You can see what changed in a pull request and review consent behaviour when adding a new tracking tool. Being open source also helps when you need to inspect how something works. Managed hosting is available, with self-hosting as an option for teams that want to run the backend themselves.

Cons: Installing through a prompt doesn’t remove the need to test the result. Custom scripts and older tracking setups may need extra work, especially if they’re scattered across the application.

Some capabilities depend on having a backend. Browser-only mode doesn’t provide central consent records or automatic jurisdiction detection, so you need to factor in either hosting costs or maintenance.

Consent withdrawal reloads the page by default. That’s something to account for if users might have unsaved work. You can change the behaviour, but then you need to handle cleanup of previously loaded scripts.

Overall: A good option for teams building with React or Next.js who want consent configuration in their codebase. The AI-assisted installation makes getting started more approachable, and the customisation options are useful. It still needs someone to check the tracking behaviour and maintain the integration as the site changes.