Cursor Bugbot vs Kalpita CodeGuard
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and Kalpita CodeGuard (Kalpita Technologies) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset.
| Field |  Cursor Bugbot | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Anysphere | Kalpita Technologies |
| HQ | United States · North America | India · India |
| Primary category | Code security | Code security |
| Also listed in | Code security, Security | Code security, Security |
| Summary | Cursor’s AI pull-request reviewer. Official docs say it identifies bugs, security issues and code-quality problems and comments with explanations and suggested fixes. | Indian autonomous DevSecOps agent that scans each commit, generates a secure patch and opens a human-approved pull request. |
| Framework tags (Agent Index) | — | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | — |
| Capabilities / tasks | pr review, appsec, remediation | appsec, sast, remediation, pr review, secrets detection, iac |
| Pricing (as published) | Usage-based on Individual and Teams plans; no separate Bugbot subscription. Cursor’s Bugbot page states Individual plans use included usage first, Teams bill from on-demand usage, and the average review costs $1.00–$1.50 depending on PR size. Enterprise trials are arranged with the account team. | Not published (demo request). |
| Pricing model | published-tiers | quote |
| Primary source | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://www.kalpitatechnologies.com/products/kalpita-codeguard |
| Last checked | 2026-10-18 | 2026-10-18 |
| Official site | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://www.kalpitatechnologies.com/products/kalpita-codeguard |
Side-by-side data is generated from the open dataset. “Vendor-claimed” frameworks are as marketed by each vendor and not verified by Agent Index; framework tags indicate relevance, not certification. Request current quotes from each vendor before buying. This page does not rank or score vendors. Sponsored comparisons, if any, will be labelled.
Also in this use case
Other verified listings that share a task tag or use-case group with Cursor Bugbot or Kalpita CodeGuard. Open a pair page or the use-case table — this is not a ranking.
- Aikido Attack AI Pentesting — Belgian autonomous AI pentest: many agents map the app, test attack paths and re-exploit each finding to confirm it, with a same-day audit-grade report.
- Attic IVON (Agentic MDR for Microsoft 365) — Dutch AI SOC agent for Microsoft 365 SMBs that triages, investigates and contains identity alerts across Defender, Sentinel and Entra ID with human sign-off.
- Cav Compliance OS agents (formerly Caveonix) — Agentic cyber assurance and continuous compliance platform whose AI agents collect evidence, test controls, find gaps against 50+ frameworks (FISMA, NIST 800-53, FedRAMP, CMMC) and generate ATO artifacts; the platform is FedRAMP High authorized.
- Cycode AI Teammates (Exploitability, Remediation and Change Impact agents) — Cycode's AppSec AI agents that assess the exploitability of findings, generate fixes, analyse change impact and query the risk graph inside the Cycode platform. · Cycode AI Teammates (Exploitability, Remediation and Change Impact agents) pair comparison
- Maze AI Agents (Maze Cloud and Maze Code) — UK AI agents that investigate every cloud and code vulnerability with code-to-cloud context, decide exploitability and deliver fixes.
- Phoenix Purple (Phoenix Security) — UK AI code-security agent platform with reachability-validated scanning, PR scanning, IDE/agent integrations and an agent that writes risk-tiered fix PRs. · Phoenix Purple (Phoenix Security) pair comparison
Use-case comparisons
- AI code security agents — 23 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)
Related
More Cursor Bugbot comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Cursor Bugbot
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Checkmarx One Assist vs Cursor Bugbot
- Claude Code security review vs Cursor Bugbot