BCMS

What the product is

BCMS is a hosted headless CMS, and its own pages also call it an agentic headless CMS. It is built for 2 people at once. Developers get typed, reusable content delivered over an API to a front end they write themselves. Clients and editors get a browser dashboard where they edit and publish without asking a developer to make the change. The company runs the infrastructure as a managed cloud service, and its FAQ is direct that BCMS cannot be self-hosted. The pages do not name where the company is based.

What you build and how

BCMS does not build your website for you. You build the site in your own framework and BCMS holds the content. The home page lists Next.js, Astro, Nuxt, Svelte and Gatsby, and the site says you keep your stack and pull content through the API. Code starters exist for Next.js, Nuxt and Gatsby, described as production-ready: you clone one, connect it and ship. The company's pitch is "less than 10 minutes to a working solution."

The content model is defined in the browser. The site says "model content in the browser. No config files required. Clients never touch a CLI." The page shows an example entry type with fields such as Title, Slug and a Typeform ID, plus a custom group of affiliate card fields. Templates hold the structure, and entries hold the content. Nested folders organize both media and entries, and a media manager handles assets. A global search, opened with a keyboard shortcut, finds entries whether a client is editing or an agent is looking something up.

Widgets are the piece that lets clients compose pages. The site describes them as structured blocks dropped between paragraphs: galleries, embeds and calls to action. In its words, "Clients compose pages. Developers keep the schema." The dashboard also shows a comments thread on an entry, with editors asking for a case study swap or a refreshed cover image, so review conversations happen next to the content.

Developers get several ways in. BCMS generates TypeScript types for entries, templates and widgets, and the home page shows a generated blog entry type file. The API, a CLI and an SDK are all listed on the company's comparison pages, as is a content management API for creating, updating and deleting entries. Media goes through a dedicated Images API, which the comparison page says works "via API query or UI editor." Webhooks send updates to other systems when events such as publishing occur, which is how a static front end knows to rebuild.

Custom Functions are the logic layer. The site says you can "deploy functions agents and apps can trigger: forms, webhooks, custom publish flows," and the code sample on the home page fetches an entry, increments a vote count and updates it from inside the CMS. The Craft CMS comparison states you can write and host serverless or custom logic inside the CMS.

The agent side is the newest part. You create an MCP key in the dashboard, add BCMS in Cursor, Claude Code or OpenClaw, and install the bcms skill. The key decides what the agent can read or change, so an agent can create and update the same content a client edits. Each agent or integration gets its own key and scopes, and the site says "least privilege by default." Permissions also scope what clients can edit. The footer lists multi-language as a feature and plugins as coming soon.

What the end visitor sees is simply your own website. BCMS never renders the public site. Content reaches it through the API, which keeps the editing experience separate from the code that deploys.

The facts the pages state

Pricing is the thin spot. The only plan names on the pages are Hobby and Pro. The FAQ says "Every plan starts with a 14-day free trial. Sign up with GitHub or Google. No credit card is required. After the trial, you pick Hobby or Pro and add billing when you want to continue. Your project and content stay in place." This is a free trial, not a free plan, and the pages shown carry no prices, storage caps, entry counts or user limits for either plan.

The FAQ answers a few other questions plainly. "Can clients change the website code? No. They edit content on the structure you defined. The frontend stays in your repo, and they do not deploy it." "Do I have to switch frameworks? No." "Can I self-host BCMS? No. BCMS is a hosted cloud CMS. You sign up, and BCMS runs the infrastructure."

The company publishes comparison pages against Craft CMS and Tina CMS, with feature tables credited to www.bejamas.com. Read them as the vendor's own framing. On those tables BCMS includes REST API, webhooks, CLI, SDK, automatic TypeScript type generation, multiple environments for development, staging and production, and custom user roles. The same tables say BCMS does not include a GraphQL API, custom field types, content approval workflows, a customizable CMS interface or content preview. The Craft page states that Craft has built-in GraphQL on its Pro tier and that BCMS lacks it.

The product and docs menu names features (Templates, Widgets, Media manager, Functions, Webhooks, Multi-language, Plugins), documentation, a glossary, API docs, a CLI and tech stack guides for Gatsby, Next.js and Nuxt.js. The company menu lists a blog, careers, an About us page, a media kit and a contact page. The pages publish no compliance claims, certifications, customer counts or integration counts.

Who it suits and who it does not

BCMS suits a freelancer or agency that builds client sites in Next.js, Astro or Nuxt and wants the client to update copy, images and case studies alone. The "clients never touch a CLI" promise and the rule that clients cannot change code or deploy make it a safe handover. It also suits a developer who wants types generated from the content model, a CLI and SDK, and separate environments for development, staging and production.

It suits teams experimenting with AI agents that manage content, since the scoped MCP key is part of the product rather than an add-on.

The caveats are concrete. It is hosted only, so a team that needs to run the CMS on its own servers cannot. There is no GraphQL, so a front end built around GraphQL queries needs another approach. The vendor's own comparison also says it lacks approval workflows and a customizable interface, so a newsroom with multi-step editorial sign-off will want to check that first. And because the pages publish no plan prices or limits, a small business budgeting a year has to start the trial to learn the cost.