import org.apache.maven.api.annotations.Experimental;
import org.apache.maven.api.annotations.Immutable;

/**
 * Represents most common tools supported by CLIng.
 *
 * @since 4.0.0
 */
@Immutable
@Experimental
public final class Tools {
    private Tools() {}

    public static final String MVN_CMD = "mvn";
    public static final String MVN_NAME = "Maven";

 * specific language governing permissions and limitations
 * under the License.
 */
package org.apache.maven.api;

import javax.tools.DocumentationTool;
import javax.tools.JavaFileManager;
import javax.tools.StandardLocation;

import java.io.File;
import java.nio.file.Path;
import java.util.Objects;
import java.util.Optional;
import java.util.StringJoiner;

    @Nonnull
    static Builder mvn(@Nonnull List<String> args, @Nonnull MessageBuilderFactory messageBuilderFactory) {
        return builder(Tools.MVN_CMD, Tools.MVN_NAME, args, messageBuilderFactory);
    }

    /**
     * Creates a new Builder instance for constructing a Maven Encrypting Tool ParserRequest.
     *
     * @param args the command-line arguments
     * @param messageBuilderFactory the factory for creating message builders

     *
     * @return the toolchain model
     */
    ToolchainModel getModel();

    /**
     * Gets the platform tool executable.
     *
     * @param toolName the tool platform independent tool name
     * @return file representing the tool executable, or null if the tool cannot be found
     */
    String findTool(String toolName);

    /**
     * Let the toolchain decide if it matches requirements defined

Wenn Sie die Benchmarks ansehen, ist es üblich, dass mehrere Tools unterschiedlichen Typs als gleichwertig verglichen werden.

Insbesondere dass Uvicorn, Starlette und FastAPI zusammen verglichen werden (neben vielen anderen Tools).

Je einfacher das Problem, das durch das Tool gelöst wird, desto besser wird die Performanz sein. Und die meisten Benchmarks testen nicht die zusätzlichen Funktionen, die das Tool bietet.

Die Hierarchie ist wie folgt:

 *   <li>Master password management</li>
 *   <li>Security settings configuration</li>
 * </ul>
 *
 * @see org.apache.maven.api.cli.Tools#MVNENC_CMD
 * @see org.apache.maven.api.cli.Tools#MVNENC_NAME
 * @since 4.0.0
 */

 *   <li>Dependency version management</li>
 *   <li>Configuration migration</li>
 *   <li>Interactive upgrade workflows</li>
 * </ul>
 *
 * @see org.apache.maven.api.cli.Tools#MVNUP_CMD
 * @see org.apache.maven.api.cli.Tools#MVNUP_NAME
 * @since 4.0.0
 */

When you check the benchmarks, it is common to see several tools of different types compared as equivalent.

Specifically, to see Uvicorn, Starlette and FastAPI compared together (among many other tools).

The simpler the problem solved by the tool, the better performance it will get. And most of the benchmarks don't test the additional features provided by the tool.

The hierarchy is like:

* **Uvicorn**: an ASGI server

 tools:

   * <<<{{{./apidocs/org/apache/maven/api/cli/mvn/package-summary.html}mvn}}>>>, the Maven build tool,

   * <<<{{{./apidocs/org/apache/maven/api/cli/mvnenc/package-summary.html}mvnenc}}>>>, the Maven Password Encryption tool,

   * <<<{{{./apidocs/org/apache/maven/api/cli/mvnsh/package-summary.html}mvnsh}}>>>, the Maven Shell tool,

// CHECKSTYLE_OFF: RegexpHeader
/**
 * Provides classes for managing Maven toolchains, which allow projects to use specific
 * tool installations (like JDKs, compilers, or other build tools) across different
 * environments without hardcoding paths.
 *
 * @since 4.0.0
 */