BotGauge vs Overmind

BotGauge 53

No OpenAPI file for the eval or red-team endpoints was found in the docs or llms-full.txt. Ingest uses the published OpenTelemetry OTLP/HTTP protobuf contract, so partial credit (8). llms.txt, llms-full.txt and Markdown for every page on Mintlify (10). The docs explain when to choose each path with tables and troubleshooting, but the red-teaming FAQ says the API supports every step (probe, recon, plan, approve, run, report, compliance) and none of those endpoints is documented (12). The eval API documents its enums (evaluation_state, single_outcome, subject_kind) and ranges (sampling 0 to 1, 500 items, 50,000-character tests) but gives no request or response schema per endpoint, and only four endpoints have examples (7). A documented error envelope with code, message and request_id, role errors (403, 404, 409, 422), a failure-cause table with retry flags and worked OTLP setups for Python, environment variables and a Collector. No list of error codes (11). /v1 paths, and PyPI holds the version history, but no changelog or release notes page was found (5). 8+10+12+7+11+5 = 53.

Overmind 81

The docs say each deployment serves its OpenAPI schema at /api/schema/, and the repository holds a generated client of 451 files under frontend/src/openapi. api.overmindlab.ai's robots.txt allows only /.well-known/, so the schema itself wasn't read. Every MCP tool takes a Pydantic input model with extra="forbid", compiled to JSON Schema in overbae/services/mcp/catalog.py, read in the source at main on 31 October 2026 (25). llms.txt with 42 pages, llms-full.txt and Markdown for every page on Mintlify (10). Tool descriptions say what each does and what it doesn't ("Does not activate application routing", "no execution", "Passive: never starts provider work"), and the MCP reference warns that an inspection-style name doesn't mean zero cost. Some workbench descriptions are clipped to the point of being hard to parse (16). Typed inputs with Literal enums, length and range bounds, UUID formats and required fields (13). The docs have worked examples for the CLI, SDK, OTLP and inference, and document status classes (401, 402, 403, 404, 409) and structured MCP errors with code, message, retryability and field details, without a full error-code list (10). The MCP server exposes a contract version and a catalogue fingerprint at overmind://interface/current. The SDK changelog has one undated Unreleased section and no product changelog was found (7). 25+10+16+13+10+7 = 81.

BotGauge 55

API responses can be narrowed by subject_ids and subject_kind, a results query takes up to 500 items, and judges read at most 20,000 characters, but no field selection or summaries are documented (12). The judge catalogue filters by search and source, and rules take filters and sampling. No pagination is documented on any list endpoint (10). Errors carry a code, a message and a request id. Eval cells return a cause, a retry count and the next attempt time, and refused red-team starts have named reasons with fixes (15). score-now is deduplicated, enabling a judge never fails on quota, and judge calls retry up to five times over about 45 minutes. No idempotency keys on other writes (8). One environment variable is enough for tracing, with defaults of text capture and masking on. Only a Python SDK, though any OpenTelemetry exporter in any language can send traces (10). 12+10+15+8+10 = 55.

Overmind 76

About 85 MCP tools in the source, all loaded for a read-write connection. A key or OAuth grant without write sees only the read tools (about 22), which is the only subset (5, plus 5 for the read-only filter). Cursor and offset pagination, limits by item count and response bytes, preview_rows bounded 1 to 1,000, query filters on traces by status, duration, tokens, cost and time, and evidence_resource links for paging retained results (20). MCP errors carry a structured code, message, retryability and field details, and authentication failures are kept apart from workflow failures. REST validation errors include details (18). Stable request_key on paid and long-running operations with conflict on a changed payload, and every tool sets readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint from its catalogue entry. Only two tools are marked destructive (20). Account connections must pass project_id on every project tool. One official SDK, Python, plus OpenTelemetry from any language and the OpenAI client for inference (8). 10+20+18+20+8 = 76.

BotGauge 10

No x402 or other machine payment (0). Paid plans for the agent product have no published prices, and botgauge.com/pricing prices the separate QA service (0). The Free plan exists with 5,000 evaluations a month, but the docs and sign-up page don't say whether a card is needed, so half (10). A person signs up in a browser at cloud.botgauge.com and creates keys in the console (0). 0+0+10+0 = 10.

Overmind 30

No x402 or other machine payment. Paid work spends prepaid credits, and 402 is documented only for insufficient credits (0). Plan prices, the credit rate ($0.01) and per-model "from" prices for training and serving are published without login (20). A Free plan with $50 of credits once exists, but neither the pricing page nor the docs say whether a card is needed, so half (10). A person signs up in a browser at console.overmindlab.ai. MCP OAuth with dynamic registration still needs a sign-in, and create_api_key needs an existing connection (0). Self-hosting under AGPL is free but runs on the operator's own Modal, OpenRouter, AWS and Hugging Face accounts, so it isn't scored as the hosted option. 0+20+10+0 = 30.

BotGauge 56

Project API keys reach one project, are shown once, stored in a form that can't be read back per the DPA, show their last-used time and revoke immediately, with documented rotation steps. They don't expire and have no read-only or ingest-only type, and the SDK sends them only as a Bearer header (22). Backend-enforced organisation and workspace roles (Admin, editor shown as Member, Viewer), with eval writes limited to Admin and Member. Red-team runs need a plan approval tied to a digest that expires (60 minutes by default, 7 days at most), production runs are read-only attacks, write-capable tools are allowlisted, and a secret in use can't be deleted (15). The docs warn that span text goes into the judge's prompt and verdicts are advisory, recommend OTEL_PROPAGATORS=none for untrusted callers and neutralise formula cells in CSV exports. No guidance for agents reading traces or transcripts back (8). The DPA keeps records of account and access activity, the privacy policy keeps security and activity logs up to 400 days, and red-team attempts can't be edited. No customer-facing audit log is documented (5). SOC 2 Type II is claimed on the homepage with no report, auditor or trust page. No security.txt, disclosure policy or bug bounty found. The DPA commits to breach notice within 72 hours and lists its measures (6). 22+15+8+5+6 = 56.

Overmind 70

API keys are account-scoped or pinned to one project, carry read, write or both, expire after 30 to 365 days or never, are shown once and show last use, and rotation is documented as replace then revoke. MCP also takes OAuth 2.1 from api.overmindlab.ai with PKCE S256, dynamic registration, a revocation endpoint, one-hour access tokens and rotating refresh tokens, with scopes overmind:read and overmind:write, the default being read. A key can only mint keys with the scope and permissions it holds, since 29 October 2026 (30). Read keys see only read tools over MCP, and the REST API refuses writes from a read-only key since the same commit (#263). Only two tools are destructive and lifecycle tools are allowlisted by name in the catalogue. The docs tell agents to confirm the GPU and rate with the user before starting a dedicated deployment, but there's no server-side approval step (15). The MCP prompts tell the agent to treat code, comments and data as untrusted content, and script output is labelled untrusted in resources. We found no guidance for agents reading trace inputs and outputs back (8). The Console's notification list shows what agents and the CLI did in a project, and overmind://activity returns it over MCP. No exportable audit log was found (10). SECURITY.md lists GitHub private vulnerability reporting and an email with acknowledgement within 3 business days. No security.txt on either host and no bug bounty. The terms claim an ISO 27001 certified management system and the site links a Vanta Trust Center, whose robots.txt disallows crawling, so neither was checked (7). 30+15+8+10+7 = 70.

BotGauge 67

botgauge, botgauge-tracing and botgauge-cli 0.1.3 on 2026-10-31 (30). Four releases of each since 20 October 2026, 0.1.0, 0.1.1, 0.1.2 and 0.1.3 (20). Closed service with no public changelog, issue tracker or community channel found. Support by email at support@botgauge.com (4). One official SDK, Python, current (10). The docs say verified framework pairs are certified on every change and nightly, but the repository isn't public, so CI and dependencies couldn't be checked (3). 30+20+4+10+3 = 67. The product is 12 days old by its first package release.

Overmind 76

overmind 0.1.115 on PyPI on 2026-10-31, and the last commit on main the same day (30). 41 PyPI releases since 21 September 2026 and 24 git tags from v0.0.15 on 18 September to v0.1.23 on 30 October (20). github.com answered 403 to this session, so issues and pull request replies weren't read. 172 commits on main from eight people since 15 September, a Discord server and a support email (8). One official SDK, Python, current with the platform (10). Public CI workflows for the platform and SDK, Dependabot bumps merged on 28 October and a CI badge. We couldn't see the pass state (8). 30+20+8+10+8 = 76.

BotGauge 18

No status page. status.botgauge.com doesn't resolve and neither the site nor the docs link one (0). With no history to read, 5. No request rate limits for ingest or the eval API. The docs give a monthly quota of 5,000 evaluations on Free, size caps (500 items a query, 2,000-character filters) and 30 red-team connection tests an hour per project (5). No 429 or Retry-After guidance. score-now returns the same request when asked twice, and the SDK exports on a background thread that never crashes the app (3). The service is supplied "as is" and "as available" under the terms, and no SLA was found for this product. The 99.9 per cent SLA on the /ai-agents page belongs to the QA service (0). The service isn't labelled beta, but the SDK is 0.x, marked "4 - Beta" on PyPI, and the docs say API shapes may change before 1.0 (5). 0+5+5+3+0+5 = 18.

Overmind 23

No status page. status.overmindlab.ai doesn't resolve, /status returns 404 and neither the site nor the docs link one (0). With no history to read, 5. No request rate limits for the REST API, MCP or OTLP ingest were found in the docs. The only pacing settings, JEV_REQUESTS_PER_MINUTE and JEV_TOKENS_PER_SECOND, are self-hosting configuration for the scoring model (0). No 429 or Retry-After guidance, but the docs give safe-retry rules in detail. Launches, uploads, pipeline runs and inference take a stable request_key, identical retries return the existing receipt, changed payloads conflict, and run_evaluation is named as not idempotent (8). The terms promise commercially reasonable efforts toward 99.5 per cent availability a month, with remedies only in an order form or separate SLA, so half (5). The site doesn't call the service beta, but the SDK is classed "3 - Alpha" on its package metadata and the public repository is seven weeks old (5). 0+5+0+8+5+5 = 23.