A
licenseNot graded
qualityC
maintenanceEnables Codex to delegate scoped frontend implementation tasks to Kimi, while Codex retains task planning, review, and acceptance.
2
MIT
Codex Kimi Bridge
Related Servers
Alternatives to Codex Kimi Bridge
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables delegating bounded tasks from Codex to Claude Code, including read-only reviews, isolated branch edits, long-running background work, and approval handling.128 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Codex to delegate bounded coding tasks to MiMo Code through a shared local daemon, supporting task boundaries, Git Worktrees, and a collaborative review workflow.3MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceLets Codex delegate coding and repository work to an installed Claude Code CLI with permission-aware inspect/write access, model and effort selection, resumable and cloud-attached sessions, and durable synchronous or asynchronous jobs.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables Codex to use an authenticated ChatGPT Web session as a reasoning and coding backend through isolated browser sessions, without granting ChatGPT direct workspace access.3111 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables Claude Code to use remote MCP servers already authenticated in Codex by reusing Codex OAuth tokens and forwarding JSON-RPC messages without requiring a second OAuth flow.-
TDQS
D1.8/5.0
Scored across 11 tools
Disambiguation2/5
Without descriptions, many tools are ambiguous. Similar names like 'kimi_delegate_and_wait' and 'kimi_delegate_task' or 'kimi_recent_sessions' and 'kimi_find_recent_session' suggest overlapping purposes, making it hard to distinguish between them.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools follow the 'kimi_' prefix and use snake_case. Most follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., 'kimi_abort', 'kimi_continue_task'), though a few are noun-based like 'kimi_bridge_status' or 'kimi_recent_sessions', which is a minor deviation.
Tool Count5/5
With 11 tools, the count is well-scoped for a bridge service. It covers a variety of operations without being excessive or insufficient, striking a good balance.
Completeness3/5
The tool names suggest task management and session handling, but there are noticeable gaps like missing 'create_task' or 'cancel_task'. Core operations like delegation and review are present, but the surface feels incomplete for a full workflow.
Maintenance
ActivityStale
ResponsivenessNo issues