BitFunvsDotCraft
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
BitFun
GCWing · Agent harness
OSSMCP
Panel
6.83 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.2
- Usefulness
- 7.2
- Cost
- 8.0
- Longevity
- 5.7
“Customising it has four tiers, which is three more tiers than most people reach before they go back to the defaults.”
DotCraft
DotHarness · Agent harness
OSSMCP
Panel
6.71 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.2
- Usefulness
- 6.5
- Cost
- 7.8
- Longevity
- 6.2
“There is a NuGet package, so the agent can now be a dependency in a solution file, next to everything else nobody upgrades.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | BitFun | DotCraft |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Runs | local | local |
| Platforms | macos, linux, windows | macos, linux, windows |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | Yes | Yes |
| MCP server | No | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | Yes | Yes |
| Multi-file edits | Yes | Yes |
| Git operations | Yes | No |
| Browser control | Yes | No |
| Sandboxed execution | No | No |
| Multi-agent orchestration | YesCustom agents are the first of BitFun's four customisation tiers. | Yes |
| Headless / CI mode | No | No |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | any | OpenAI, Anthropic, ChatGPT subscription, any OpenAI-compatible endpoint |
| Bring your own model | YesBitFun is described as model-agnostic: you pick a provider, enter its API key and choose models at first run. | Yes |
| Local models | No | YesAny provider speaking the OpenAI or Anthropic protocol can be configured, which covers a local server; no specific local runtime is named in the README. |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | byok | byok |
| Starts at | $0/mo | $0/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Bring your own key | Yes | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| GitHub stars | 2,370 | 396 |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | BitFun | DotCraft | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 7.3 | 6.8 | BitFun — Pick it if you think in dashboards rather than transcripts; pick a terminal agent if a scrolling log is genuinely how you like to work. |
| El Crítico | 6.5 | 6.3 | BitFun — It drives the browser, the terminal, desktop applications, the filesystem and remote workspaces, and the row records no sandbox around any of it. |
| El Profesor | 6.8 | 7.0 | DotCraft — Conversations, memory, agents, skills and plugins are stored with the project rather than with the entry point, so the desktop app and the embedded runtime address one state. |
| La Inversora | 6.5 | 6.3 | BitFun — 2,047 stars, a personal namespace and no price anywhere: distribution is real, the business is not, and the two rarely stay apart for long. |
| La Jefa | 6.0 | 6.3 | DotCraft — The AppServer edition means this becomes a service my platform team runs, which is a real cost, and there is still no single sign-on in front of it. |
| El Hacker | 7.5 | 7.5 | no preference |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.