Antigravity vs Kimi: tracking usage on macOS

This is not an argument about which tool writes better code - that depends on your work, and anyone claiming otherwise is guessing. It is about something narrower and more answerable: how each one is metered, and what you can actually see while you use them.

How each is tracked

Antigravity uses no separate credential step, and it appears alongside everything else you track, with nothing extra to configure.

Kimi uses an existing Kimi Code login, a Kimi coding key, or a Moonshot key, and it is the one provider where local logs are also read, so usage stays visible when the API is not answering.

Why this matters if you run both

Running two tools means two places to check, two sets of limits, and two chances to be surprised mid-task. The cost is rarely the money - it is losing your thread because something stopped answering and you did not see it coming.

Watching both in one place

SessionWatcher shows Antigravity and Kimi together in the macOS menu bar. It reads and displays usage on your Mac; it does not read your code or your conversations. That boundary matters more when you are pointing one tool at two providers.

Per-tool detail is in the Antigravity tracker guide and the Kimi tracker guide.

Frequently asked questions

Can I track both at once?

Yes - both appear in the same menu bar reading.

What does each need?

Antigravity uses no separate credential step. Kimi uses an existing Kimi Code login, a Kimi coding key, or a Moonshot key.

Does it read my code?

No. Usage only, never code or conversation content.