moonbridge
Related Servers
Alternatives to moonbridge
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceBridges Claude Code to Kimi Code via MCP, enabling task delegation with file and command execution.3MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP bridge that enables Claude Code to consult the Kimi AI model in a structured challenge-loop for code review, debugging, and architecture evaluation.17 npm2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceBridges MCP clients to Moonshot AI's Kimi Code CLI, enabling file analysis, brainstorming, batch tasks, code reviews, and session management within editors like Claude Desktop and Cursor.14522 npm1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables users to request a second opinion from a locally authenticated Claude Code model via MCP tools, supporting asynchronous jobs with restricted tools for safety.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables Claude Code to delegate questions and BSL code reviews to a locally installed Kimi Code CLI, running it as a second agent with its own MCP servers and optional neutral profile.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceBridges Codex Desktop with Kimi Code CLI, enabling direct control of AI coding sessions via MCP tools for prompt, status, cancel, and CLI operations.118 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 16 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: setup introspection, model/capability discovery, three separate paid operation modes, their async counterparts, per-mode dry runs, and job lifecycle management. Even the job tools split cleanly into status, result, consume, cancel, and list functions.
All tools share the kimi_ prefix and snake_case convention, with predictable suffixes like _async, _dry_run, and kimi_job_*. The naming is uniform and easy to navigate even though discovery tools are noun-style while operation tools are verb-style.
At 16 tools, this is slightly above the typical well-scoped range, but the count is justified by the three natural groups: metadata/status, paid operations with dry-run and async variants, and job lifecycle. No tool feels redundant, though the surface is a bit large.
The tool surface covers the full intended workflow: preflight status, capability and model discovery, three operation modes, dry-run previews, and a complete async job lifecycle from start through list, status, fetch, consume, and cancel. Sync calls also expose job IDs for recovery, leaving no obvious dead ends.