sipi.bot vs Kong AI Gateway
Kong AI Gateway brings AI traffic control to Kong's enterprise gateway. sipi.bot is a pre-spend firewall. One manages request flow; the other governs money.
What Kong AI Gateway does well
Enterprise-grade API gateway: routing, rate limits, auth, and AI-specific plugins.
Policy at the edge for LLM traffic across your fleet.
The right choice when you're already on Kong.
Where it falls short
Rate limits cap requests, not dollars — a loop under the limit can still cost $12,400.
No merchant allowlist, category budgets, or approval queue for agent spend.
It's infrastructure; it doesn't decide whether a purchase may happen.
Where sipi.bot wins
Dollar-level decisions: APPROVED, BLOCKED, or FLAGGED before settlement.
Merchant allowlists, category rules, velocity limits, time-of-day rules.
Approval workflow for edge cases.
~5 ms, no model call.
When to use which
Kong for traffic policy; sipi.bot for spend policy. They compose: firewall first, then route.
Side by side
| Dimension | Kong AI Gateway | sipi.bot |
|---|---|---|
| Layer | Traffic gateway | Transaction decision layer |
| Controls | Rate limits, routing | Caps, allowlists, approvals |
| Unit | Requests | Dollars |
| Decision | Route / throttle | APPROVED / BLOCKED / FLAGGED |
| Deploy | Edge/self-host | Hosted or MIT self-host |
FAQ
Can Kong's rate limits stop a runaway bill?
They cap volume, not value. A retry loop under the rate limit still racks up spend. sipi.bot caps the dollars.
Do they overlap?
Minimally — Kong routes and throttles; sipi.bot decides. Most production stacks can run both.
Is sipi.bot a gateway?
No — it's a decision API and MCP tool. It doesn't proxy traffic.
Related
Stop the next $12,400 night.
One API call (or MCP tool) in front of every agent transaction — APPROVED, BLOCKED, or FLAGGED, deterministic, ~5 ms, fully logged.
See plans — from $99/mo Try a live check