Cursor Bugbot vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent
Quick answer
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) (GMO Flatt Security (GMO Flatt Security株式会社)) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index.
They share no framework tags in our dataset.
This is not a ranking.
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) (GMO Flatt Security (GMO Flatt Security株式会社)) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset.
| Field |  Cursor Bugbot |  Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Anysphere | GMO Flatt Security (GMO Flatt Security株式会社) |
| HQ | United States · North America | Japan · Asia Pacific |
| 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. | Japanese security AI agent that continuously finds vulnerabilities with AI-SAST and AI-DAST (including logic, authentication and authorisation flaws), generates fix patches and opens pull requests with unit tests, and runs AI penetration tests that actually attempt intrusion to prove exploitability. |
| Frameworks (vendor-stated) | — | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | ISO 27001 (ISMS certification, vendor claim) |
| Capabilities / tasks | pr review, appsec, remediation | appsec, sast, remediation, pr review, pen test management, vulnerability management |
| 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. | Published on flatt.tech/takumi: base fee JPY 70,000/month (excl. tax) including 250 credits shared across diagnosis, auto-fix and AI pentest, 15 Takumi Guard users and Runner minutes; overage JPY 280 per credit; a 30-day AI penetration test offer at JPY 980,000 (excl. tax, through end of 2026). |
| Pricing model | published-tiers | published-tiers |
| Primary source | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://flatt.tech/takumi |
| Last checked | 2026-10-18 | 2026-10-20 |
| Official site | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://flatt.tech/takumi |
FAQ (from this dataset)
What is the difference between Cursor Bugbot and Takumi byGMO security AI agent?
Both are listed under Code security. Shared tasks: pr-review, appsec, remediation. Cursor Bugbot-only tasks: none. Takumi byGMO security AI agent-only tasks: sast, pen-test-management, vulnerability-management. Differences are from stored category and task tags, not a ranking.
Which one publishes pricing?
Cursor Bugbot: 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. Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing): Published on flatt.tech/takumi: base fee JPY 70,000/month (excl. tax) including 250 credits shared across diagnosis, auto-fix and AI pentest, 15 Takumi Guard users and Runner minutes; overage JPY 280 per credit; a 30-day AI penetration test offer at JPY 980,000 (excl. tax, through end of 2026).
Where are Cursor Bugbot and Takumi byGMO security AI agent headquartered?
Cursor Bugbot publishes HQ in United States. Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) publishes HQ in Japan.
Also in this use case
Other verified listings that share a task tag or use-case group with Cursor Bugbot or Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing). Open a pair page or the use-case table — this is not a ranking.
- Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) — German AppSec product from Düsseldorf: a team of agents audits repositories (SAST, secrets, SCA, IaC, CI/CD) and cloud accounts, triages signals so only confirmed findings surface, pentests running apps inside a verified scope with a separate agent reproducing every finding, reviews pull requests with a merge-blocking status check, and opens fix pull requests that run your tests but never merge themselves. · Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) pair comparison
- Covasant TPRM (agentic third-party risk management) — Third-party risk product from Hyderabad-headquartered Covasant. Purpose-built AI agents onboard vendors through due-diligence workflows, chase vendors who are slow to respond, keep watching news, sanctions and financial data, and, when risk thresholds break, open remediation workflows, track vendor responses, escalate unresolved issues and produce DORA, SOX and NIST reporting packages.
- noze CyberAgent (AI agent for continuous attack-surface monitoring, automated validation pentesting and NIS2 evidence) — Italian agent for mid-sized companies and NIS2 entities without an in-house SOC: after verifying domain control it continuously discovers assets and assesses network, web apps and APIs, correlates findings with EPSS and CISA KEV, confirms exploitability with automated validation pentests, ranks risks by business impact and prepares NIS2, DORA and ISO 27001 reports; the team decides what to fix.
Use-case comparisons
- AI code security agents — 33 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)
- Agentic pentesting AI agents — 33 listings (Autonomous or AI-assisted penetration testing, attack-surface testing and exploitable-path verification)
Related
- Cursor Bugbot alternatives
- Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) alternatives
- Best code security AI agents
More Cursor Bugbot comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Cursor Bugbot
- AISLE (autonomous vulnerability discovery, triage and verified-fix agents) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Cursor Bugbot
More Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing) comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing)
- AISLE (autonomous vulnerability discovery, triage and verified-fix agents) vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing)
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing)
- Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing)
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Takumi byGMO security AI agent (AI-SAST/AI-DAST diagnosis, automatic fix pull requests and AI penetration testing)