pumaDB vs Acti: Detailed Comparison

Overview

pumaDB and Acti are both AI-powered tools, but they serve fundamentally different purposes. pumaDB is a hosted memory store for AI agentsβ€”a simple JSON database accessible via MCP or REST that lets agents remember facts, preferences, and state across sessions. Acti is an agentic keyboard that lets users type an intent, hold a bar, and instantly get results or trigger actions across apps and APIs without switching context.

Feature Comparison

FeaturepumaDBActi
Primary FunctionDurable memory storage for AI agents (JSON rows, MCP/REST)Agentic keyboard that triggers actions and retrieves info from apps/APIs
Target UserDevelopers building AI agents that need persistent memoryEnd users who want to speed up tasks across apps without switching
Integration MethodMCP server (hosted) or REST API for server-side appsKeyboard overlay on mobile/desktop; long-press Acti Bar to invoke
Memory/Data ModelStructured JSON rows in tables with version historyNo built-in memory; relies on real-time API calls and app integrations
CustomizationDefine tables, row schemas, and memory types via APICreate custom Skill Keys by mashing up APIs and apps
Safety & ReviewRate limits, scoped tables, version history, natural edits, viewer linksNot explicitly mentioned; actions are immediate
EcosystemWorks with any MCP-compatible client (Codex, ChatGPT, Claude, OpenClaw)Community Skill Keys marketplace with thousands of downloads
Setup ComplexityMinimal: add MCP server URL or use API keyMinimal: install keyboard app and start typing

Pricing

pumaDB offers a free tier with 20 tables, 1,000 rows per table, and 25 MB total storage. Rate limits: 30 writes/min per key, 60 reads/min per key. No pricing page found; likely freemium or usage-based.

Acti pricing is not explicitly listed on the website. The app appears to be free with optional in-app purchases or subscriptions for premium Skill Keys. Selected for Google AI Startups program.

Pros and Cons

pumaDB Pros

  • Zero infrastructure: no database setup, vector store, or RAG stack needed
  • Durable, reviewable memory with version history and natural language edits
  • Works with any MCP-compatible agent client (ChatGPT, Claude, Codex, etc.)
  • Simple JSON schema makes it easy to store facts, preferences, task state, and more
  • Built-in safety rails: rate limits, scoped tables, and viewer links for large data

pumaDB Cons

  • Limited to 1,000 rows per table and 25 MB total storage on free tier
  • No built-in vector search or semantic retrieval (pure JSON storage)
  • Requires MCP or REST integration; not a consumer-facing app

Acti Pros

  • Instant action: type intent, hold bar, get result without app switching
  • Rich ecosystem of community-created Skill Keys (100+ apps/APIs)
  • Custom Skill Builder lets you mash up APIs and apps for unique workflows
  • Selected for Google AI Startups, indicating strong backing
  • Works across mobile and desktop with a simple keyboard gesture

Acti Cons

  • No persistent memory; each action is stateless and real-time
  • Dependent on third-party APIs and app integrations for functionality
  • Privacy concerns: keyboard may capture sensitive input
  • Limited to actions that can be triggered via keyboard; not a general-purpose agent memory

Verdict

Choose pumaDB if you're building AI agents that need durable, reviewable memory without infrastructure overhead. Choose Acti if you want a consumer-friendly keyboard that instantly retrieves information or triggers actions across apps. They solve different problems: pumaDB is a backend memory layer for agents, while Acti is a front-end productivity tool for humans.