Bridgekitty vs Hermes Action Bridge

In-depth architectural comparison of the Bridgekitty and Hermes Action Bridge MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

B

Choose Bridgekitty when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: bridge_get_quote, bridge_execute, bridge_status.

Explore Bridgekitty Details

Choose Hermes Action Bridge when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Developer Tools domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: hermes_run, hermes_plan, hermes_capabilities.

Explore Hermes Action Bridge Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	B Bridgekitty Developer Tools	Hermes Action Bridge Developer Tools
Summary	Cross-chain bridge aggregator — compares LI.FI, deBridge, Relay, Across & more for best rates.	Delegate real-world actions from Claude Code, Codex, and other agents to Hermes Agent.
Category & Scope	Developer Tools	Developer Tools

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bridgekitty": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@persistenceone/bridgekitty"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "hermes-action-bridge": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "skills"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons