DottaandPaperclip 1353a232f2 test(e2e): add a portable active follow-up journey (#18345)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people direct agents while their work is active.
> - Product E2E checks must prove that saved user input reaches the
intended work.
> - The existing active chat story depends on a file in a local agent
workspace.
> - That setup cannot qualify an attached deployment with remote agent
execution.
> - This change adds one shared active follow-up journey through the
normal task UI and API.
> - Independent native operation, saved input, final reply, and cleanup
checks make the result inspectable across targets.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Product E2E coverage for a user follow-up sent while a native agent is
working.

**Current behavior**

The classic chat story holds work open with a local file. The shared
deployment-targeted harness has no active follow-up journey. A running
heartbeat alone cannot prove that work was active when input arrived.

**Proposed behavior**

Run one bounded command through the real native provider. Observe its
active execution before and after one follow-up is saved. Require one
final reply with the late requirement, correct task and agent identity,
an empty input queue, and visible readback after reload. Use the same
story on managed and attached targets.

## What Changed

- Add a shared `followup-while-running` journey with normal task
creation and reply submission.
- Require a bound native turn and pending shell execution at the input
boundary. Retain a closed receipt with source identity and a row hash.
- Accept one steered work run or one normal successor (1–2 native runs).
Preserve every other journey's declared run contract.
- Reuse the saved native final reply observer, run binding checks, usage
collection, target lifecycle and private evidence path.
- Accept canonical builtin/process execution events independent of
provider tool display names; calibrate against real OpenCode, Codex and
ACP mappers. Reject Paperclip semantic tool names across native
wrappers/prefixes and unnamed or ambiguous builtin calls.
- Recognize only the observed legacy PRP v1
builtin/bash/unknown/readOnly=false command shape and fail promptly when
owned work finishes before a live boundary can be observed.
- Ready the task page/composer before the observed command boundary, use
a bounded 90-second command, and preserve active-after-persistence
proof.
- Add adversarial oracle and retained-result calibration. Register the
journey, include its sources in the definition hash, and document its
coverage.
- Keep six real browser document-readiness checks and verify
shared-deadline behavior with a deterministic clock/state test that
rejects timeout-reset mutations.

## Verification

Exact current head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` passed
[full CI run
41142552195](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41142552195):
all 49 workflow jobs reached accepted terminal results, including
typecheck, build, every test lane and aggregate verify. All 59 reported
checks are terminal: 55 success, three expected skips and one neutral
5/5 Paperclip review. Snyk passed. [Fresh Greptile
review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18345#issuecomment-6528913235)
explicitly names this exact head and gives 5/5. No review threads remain
open. The PR is mergeable.

These source gates do not establish a live QA pass at this head. Fresh
protected QA at this exact source and the separately recorded deployed
application/runtime remains required before primary merge and daily
admission.

Historical live QA staging **PASS** on qualified commit
`af9e091b15b5e24b6b2cc1b424523430cc2ab024`: 6/6 checks, all five phases
including cleanup, two native work runs, and the configured
model/environment check passed. The [sanitized qualification
report](https://pages.paperclip.ing/evals-qa-smoke-41122620146-1/)
records that exact measurement.

Final integration head `e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929` merges
exact actual squash `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` from
[#18254](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18254) into
previous head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23`. The merge had
no conflicts. All 18 files in this PR's change set, the complete 45-file
shared journey directory, and six shared native/evidence helpers retain
their exact previous-head Git blobs: 59 scoped files in total. The
production clarification helper remains blob
`800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. Follow-up 1–2 runs, question
1–3 runs, older exact counts, owned native event checks,
active-before/after persistence proof, cleanup/accounting and feature
mappings remain unchanged.

Source integration head `e55d74491f5bcd99c1455e9ace02bd7ad7319fae`
integrates exact actual squash
`8595efc20bda3ce20a9fbbf34a5d156a6fcf6d57` from
[#18385](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18385). The merge
had no conflicts. All 17 files in this PR's change set and six shared
native/evidence helpers retain their exact Git blobs from previous head
`162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2`. This preserves the follow-up
and question readiness checks, feature mappings, six closed follow-up
check IDs, immutable before/after active-operation proof, follow-up 1–2
runs, question 1–3 runs and older exact counts.

Previously reviewed head `e54d64743964b1a19d165537bebbe62c50389a23` adds
a separate test-only reliability repair on top of that source
integration. It replaces one scheduler-sensitive browser case with a
deterministic Vitest clock and locator-state model that calls the actual
production helper. The six other real Chromium checks remain
byte-for-byte unchanged and pass **6/6**. Focused unit suites pass
**51/51**, including the deterministic deadline case. This is six
browser checks plus focused unit coverage, not seven browser checks.

The model makes the panel ready at 100 ms, the supplied answer ready at
600 ms, and full valid content ready at 1,300 ms. It requires rejection
at the shared 1,000 ms deadline and records immutable rejection state
before simulating a 10-second scheduler stall. Both restarted-timeout
mutations fail: resetting all waits wrongly resolves at 1,300 ms;
resetting matcher timeouts while keeping the final real deadline guard
rejects only at 1,300 ms with valid content present. The genuine helper
rejects at 1,000 ms with the answer still incomplete. The production
helper is unchanged, Git blob
`800a747284db19b8484650b6759e8bd1f356839d`. That two-file test-only
patch changed no journey, application, run, accounting, model or runtime
behavior. Its six-browser/51-unit results are prior-head evidence; the
complete patch is unchanged in the new integration.

The final source also retains the actual merged question-primary squash
`d9354bbfc35ef74333e90e596ce21dc8e59149b9` from
[#18346](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18346). Later
commits `409117451da260a03fc28a3107c7808ecbe68f8f` and
`ea3e7b1d1bed562351fcf4722c7175001b987b59` bound question document
readiness to one campaign deadline and test that waits cannot restart
it. Commit `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` adds
question/follow-up report feature mappings and coverage. These files are
unchanged by the final merge.

The imported upstream source has real application changes:
[#18334](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18334) makes
managed skill content durable and extends native skill-test contracts;
[#18350](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18350) requires
managed Cloud shared storage and bootstrap prerequisites. #18385 updates
TestOps job metadata and repairs their combined maintenance fixture. The
new merge additionally imports
[#18383](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18383) at
`81ecaf0654fe79a2a2dbda6588f033e39ee610e4`, which bounds failed
lifecycle verification;
[#18357](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/18357) at
`45a3a92e6dc52d20923b9aa34a22fee2ec5443f9`, which persists
sandbox-creation ownership and updates cleanup/adapter/plugin contracts;
and #18254 at `18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef`, which accepts
a valid late Antigravity authorization URL while native authentication
drains. This PR's diff against exact upstream
`18b1637b6371a6a6adade857e2a73654ee626fef` contains only journey tests,
report coverage and documentation. Harness source and deployed
application/runtime identity are separate inputs. This source
integration does not deploy the imported application changes or claim
the QA target runs this application revision.

This final SHA has not been measured by the historical run above:
**fresh QA at this exact final head is required before primary merge**,
followed by normal TestOps verification/admission. Fresh exact-head CI
and review have passed as recorded above. The live measurement must
record the actual separately deployed QA application/runtime identity.

Seven whole-file blobs remain identical to the qualified SHA. All paths
are relative to `tests/runner-e2e/`:

| Journey/helper | Unchanged Git blob |
| --- | --- |
| `product-journeys/active-followup-evidence.ts` |
`83a5d9fab52abb9849a40e83eca6b6a9c29bf587` |
| `product-journeys/active-followup.test.ts` |
`728160c610c18292d2cf06d4a87d25a8719f1734` |
| `native-task-reply.ts` | `59d11f1a178dad9db3da8fa2342ff93643cb9922` |
| `native-event-envelope.ts` |
`305b0b456c59c511ee328e529ad574c0583075a0` |
| `run-observations.ts` | `08c8ad184a821a7cd536926b3d7e3d1156a1e3da` |
| `user-actions.ts` | `e9611348dc41e17899367dab2e3b36d3d1be9480` |
| `stop-redirect-flow.ts` | `4580bd605a425bc72511e02d988492acbec8d60e` |

The follow-up preservation comparison against historical `af9` has three
explicit exceptions; no whole-file identity is claimed for them. The
separately documented question readiness and report additions above also
require final-source verification:

1. `product-journeys/agent-flows.ts` adds `question-answer-resume` to
the `AgentJourney` type exclusion, alongside follow-up. Its remaining
contents and runtime helper bodies are byte-for-byte unchanged.
Qualified blob `a0afaa968c1d854476159fef21de7b6dd50a4a98`; final blob
`0cc797c0ae594e7769338e63a80c4f67e29e4a54`.
2. The common run-count helper is centralized in `success-contract.ts`
and re-exported by the catalog. It accepts follow-up **1–2**,
clarification **1–3**, and each older paid journey's exact count. The
follow-up catalog entry, maximum of two runs, six required checks,
native dispatch, collection and retained-run contract remain
byte-for-byte unchanged. The helper's text differs; its preserved count
semantics are verified explicitly.
3. `product-journeys/active-followup-flow.ts` changes exactly one
composer readiness assertion from Playwright's implicit five-second
default to an explicit 30-second timeout, matching `submitTaskReply` for
attached targets. Prompts, actions, native evidence, before/after
persistence proof and grading otherwise compare byte-for-byte unchanged.
Qualified blob `64392329198a1a4d9828e32834d4507e175216e6`; final blob
`2746b5ba89e2af26b4097ba7897913186786ac5d`. This correction is why a
fresh final-head QA run is required.

- **310 focused tests passed at current final head
`e72e20ad111bd94728d38606015d1fdac3c92929`**: 286
journey/evidence/catalog/report/shared-deadline tests in 14 files and 24
native authentication/real-child stream-order tests in two files. Both
invocations used Node24 and one Vitest worker. The earlier `e55`
integration also passed 365 focused tests, including 40 Cloud
configuration and 40 TestOps metadata cases; those results remain
prior-source evidence.
- **157 explicit count assertions passed again at the current final
head**, including both interactive ranges, older exact counts,
invalid/fractional/non-number values and catalog/contract export
identity. The maximum bounds and six closed follow-up check IDs also
matched.
- Maps and diff checks passed. The official QA runtime-import preflight
passed on Node24 at the current final head without network access. It
uses a dummy adapter and no credentials. It does not prove target
connectivity, sign-in, model readiness or deployed application/runtime
identity. Those require the normal protected QA run. No model/provider
work or optional Runner release was dispatched.
- Current local runtime dependencies use ignored isolated
workspace-source views. No shared dependencies or compilers were
changed. A previous local typecheck attempt hit stale reused Runner
declarations. No full repository typecheck, test run or build was
repeated locally; the successful exact-head full CI run above now
supplies these gates.
- CI on previous head `162e341cda5b627639b486b4019a1675bb018ea2` failed
the Cloud/local maintenance fixture in [server shard
9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133716802/job/124331643100),
plus dependent verify. The actual tested merge combined that head with
master `198218bf554877fe3b7a83742eefb3b8f12392c6`. A Cloud child
selected local-disk storage and hit the new shared-storage policy. This
was a deterministic upstream fixture mismatch; no unchanged failed-job
retry was used.
- The actual #18385 repair configures a valid Cloud child, verifies
local bytes independently, checks the expected provider mismatch and
retains exact stored-config readback. Its own final head
`b76d5dd40d7711f1b5f6b6316b1114c0aae02d57` passed 59 checks, including
[server shard
9](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41133876636/job/124331450635).
That prior result supports the repair; it does not replace this final
head's fresh CI. Separate repair candidate #18392 and its
source/evidence are retained as superseded history.
- A local attempt to run the database fixture could not start PostgreSQL
because the host exhausted macOS semaphores. A first setup attempt also
failed package resolution before test execution. Skipped database cases
and these setup failures are not passes. No kernel settings, shared
processes or databases were changed.
- The complete previous-head CI run
[41138618869](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869)
finished with one underlying failure: [Runner Vitest shard
1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41138618869/job/124347859445)
expected native Antigravity login success but observed failure at
`antigravity-auth.test.ts:101`. The lane had one failed test, 1,994
passing tests and eight skipped tests. Aggregate verify failed only
because of this lane. All other 57 checks were accepted, including
build, typecheck, all server/browser suites, Runner shard 2, Snyk and
exact-head 5/5 reviews. No unchanged retry was requested.
- The independently reviewed #18254 repair removes an invalid cross-pipe
ordering assumption: a valid URL on stderr can arrive after the
authenticate response on stdout during drain. Its real-child regression
forces both orders. The current final source imports that actual squash;
the 24 focused authentication cases pass here. Fresh full CI and
exact-head review have now passed for this source, as recorded above.
The earlier failed result is not relabeled.
- The original live compatibility failure is retained: an older PRP v1
pack labeled builtin `bash` as operation `unknown`, causing the observer
to miss the command and never send the follow-up. Its exact shape was
reproduced red before repair. Generic unknown operations, semantic
tools, wrappers, read-only work and foreign provenance remain rejected.
The historical qualified pass used the repaired oracle; no failed result
was relabeled.
- Earlier CI on `6fad965d69` hit an unchanged heartbeat test's
three-second adapter-call wait; its original failure and one narrow
rerun remain recorded. The qualified SHA subsequently passed CI. An
earlier report-catalog subprocess failure is retained. The final focused
Node24 run now includes that suite and passes after the documented
report feature mappings.

## Risks

The fixture asks the native agent to run one bounded `sleep 90` command.
The observer must see actual active native execution; a fast or
noncompliant turn fails rather than passing from elapsed time. A
completed result requires one or two bounded native work runs, source
attribution, configured model/environment, and collection. Unknown
provider prices stay unknown. This change does not alter production
execution or grant new access.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning and code execution. The host
does not expose an exact underlying model version or context-window
size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with available version and
capability details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs; existing
follow-up execution fixes do not provide this deployment-targeted test
- [x] I have described the issue in-PR following the enhancement
template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links
- [x] My branch name describes the change and contains no internal
ticket or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the new focused tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation
- [x] I have considered and documented risks
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-30 18:37:17 -05:00
2026-03-07 02:57:28 +09:00

Paperclip is the app people use to manage AI agents for work.

Quickstart · Docs · GitHub · Discord · Twitter · Website

MIT License Stars Discord Security posture verified by Superagent

Star History Rank


Sign up for the Paperclip Cloud waitlist →


Paperclip is the app people use to manage AI agents for work.

Open-source orchestration for teams of AI agents.

If OpenClaw is an employee, Paperclip is the company.

Paperclip is a Node.js server and React UI that orchestrates a team of AI agents to run a business. Bring your own agents, assign goals, and track work and costs from one dashboard. Choose models and harnesses per agent while keeping your team's tasks, skills, permissions, and history in one place.

It looks like a task manager. Under the hood: org charts, budgets, governance, goal alignment, and agent coordination.

Manage business goals, not pull requests.

Step Example
01 Define the goal "Build the #1 AI note-taking app to $1M MRR."
02 Hire the team CEO, CTO, engineers, designers, marketers — any bot, any provider.
03 Approve and run Review strategy. Set budgets. Hit go. Monitor from the dashboard.

Works
with
OpenClaw
OpenClaw
Claude Code
Claude Code
Codex
Codex
Cursor and Cursor Cloud
Cursor
+ Cloud
Gemini CLI
Gemini CLI
OpenCode
OpenCode
Pi
Pi
Hermes and Hermes Gateway
Hermes
+ Gateway
Grok Build
Grok Build
Kimi Code
Kimi Code

If it can receive a heartbeat, it's hired.

Custom processes, HTTP endpoints, and external adapter packages extend the roster. See the adapter overview for setup and capabilities.


Paperclip is right for you if

  • ✅ You want to build autonomous AI organizations
  • ✅ You coordinate many different agents (OpenClaw, Codex, Claude, Cursor) toward a common goal
  • ✅ You have 20 simultaneous Claude Code terminals open and lose track of what everyone is doing
  • ✅ You want agents running autonomously 24/7, but still want to audit work and chime in when needed
  • ✅ You want to monitor costs and enforce budgets
  • ✅ You want a process for managing agents that feels like using a task manager
  • ✅ You want to manage your autonomous businesses from your phone

The four pillars

Four things have to work for an organization of AI agents to actually produce: the tasks, the org, the training, and the infrastructure. Paperclip is built around exactly those four pillars.

The four pillars of Paperclip
Pillar Built for What it covers
Agentic Task Manager — Declare intent. Agents work. You verify the output. Everyone, daily Tasks, approvals & review gates · proactive agent coworkers · auditable routines & workflows · verify from diffs, screenshots & tests
Org Chart for Agents — Roles, permissions & boundaries for humans and agents. Managers Mixed human + agent org chart · responsibilities, delegation, specialization · governance: who can do what · scoped secrets & company boundaries · connection permissions & responsible-user identities
Agent Employee Training — Design, train & evaluate your AI employees. Enablers Skill Studio & shared org-wide skills · evals & saved test runs · active learning loops & quality metrics · performance reviews for agents · saved test inputs · skill version history & restore · reusable team templates
Agentic OS — The infrastructure that makes the work run. IT & platform Cross-provider runtime: any model, any agent · sandboxing, integrations & MCP servers · SSO, GRC, RBAC & cost controls · data privacy, internal trace collection, compounding data value · personal & shared app connections · run history & opt-in tracing

Features

🔌 Bring Your Own Agent

Any agent, any runtime, one org chart. If it can receive a heartbeat, it's hired.

🎯 Goal Alignment

Link tasks and projects to your organization goals. Agents receive the goal context behind their work.

💓 Heartbeats

Agents wake for assigned work, follow-up messages, or configured schedules. Delegation flows up and down the org chart.

💰 Cost Control

Company, agent, and project budgets. Track reported spend, get threshold alerts, and pause work at configured limits.

🏢 Multi-Organization

One deployment, many organizations. Separate tasks, agents, permissions, and activity histories for each.

🎫 Task Threads

Keep conversations, plans, blockers, files, and run history attached to the work. Assign tasks to agents or people.

🛡️ Governance

Configure review and approval stages, approve hires, and pause, reassign, or stop work when needed.

📊 Org Chart

Hierarchies, roles, reporting lines. Your agents have a boss, a title, and a job description.

📱 Mobile Ready

Monitor and manage your autonomous businesses from anywhere.

🔗 Apps & Connections

Connect services such as GitHub, Notion, and Railway, or your own MCP server. Set gateway actions to Allowed, Ask first, or Off.

👥 Shared Agents, Personal Accounts

Choose who can use a connection and which agents can access it. Managed GitHub operations can use the account of the person directing the work.

🧠 Skills & Skill Studio

Install or write shared skills, test them with saved inputs, inspect results, and restore earlier versions.

📅 Scheduled Routines

Run recurring work on a schedule or trigger it through an API or webhook. Each run has a task, an owner, and a history.

📎 Artifacts & Feedback

Find the files and documents agents produce. Preview supported formats and leave comments on specific passages in documents.

📦 Ready-Made Teams

Preview and install teams with roles, skills, projects, and routines. Choose their runtimes and make the setup your own.

Experimental Agent Chat and chat/email connectors add conversations with agents in Paperclip and through configured services such as Slack, Discord, Telegram, and AgentMail. Enable the relevant instance settings to try them.


Problems Paperclip solves

Without Paperclip With Paperclip
❌ You have 20 Claude Code tabs open and can't track which one does what. On reboot you lose everything. ✅ Tasks are ticket-based, conversations are threaded, sessions persist across reboots.
❌ You manually gather context from several places to remind your bot what you're actually doing. ✅ Context flows from the task up through the project and company goals — your agent always knows what to do and why.
❌ Folders of agent configs are disorganized and you're re-inventing task management, communication, and coordination between agents. ✅ Paperclip gives you org charts, ticketing, delegation, and governance out of the box — so you run a company, not a pile of scripts.
❌ Runaway loops waste hundreds of dollars of tokens and max your quota before you even know what happened. ✅ Spend tracking, budget alerts, and automatic pauses help you control the cost of ongoing work.
❌ You have recurring jobs (customer support, social, reports) and have to remember to manually kick them off. ✅ Routines create assigned tasks on a schedule, with outputs and run history you can inspect.
❌ You have an idea, you have to find your repo, fire up Claude Code, keep a tab open, and babysit it. ✅ Add a task in Paperclip. Your coding agent works on it until it's done. Management reviews their work.

Why Paperclip is special

Paperclip handles the hard orchestration details correctly.

Atomic task checkout. A single assignee and execution locks prevent competing runs from claiming the same task.
Persistent work context. Tasks, comments, and documents stay in Paperclip. Supporting adapters resume saved sessions across runs.
Runtime skill injection. Agents can learn Paperclip workflows and project context at runtime, without retraining.
Governance with rollback. Approval gates are enforced, config changes are revisioned, and bad changes can be rolled back safely.
Accountable connections. Human access, agent eligibility, and gateway action permissions are separate controls. Approve a call once or save a revocable rule.
Goal-aware execution. Linked tasks and projects carry goal ancestry so agents see the "why," not just a title.
Portable company templates. Export/import orgs, agents, and skills with secret scrubbing and collision handling.
Organization boundaries. Company-scoped access checks keep each organization's work, agents, and activity separate within one deployment.

What's Under the Hood

Paperclip is a full control plane, not a wrapper. Before you build any of this yourself, know that it already exists:

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                       PAPERCLIP SERVER                       │
│                                                              │
│  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  │
│  │Identity & │  │  Work &   │  │ Heartbeat │  │Governance │  │
│  │  Access   │  │   Tasks   │  │ Execution │  │& Approvals│  │
│  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  │
│                                                              │
│  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  │
│  │ Org Chart │  │Workspaces │  │  Plugins  │  │  Budget   │  │
│  │ & Agents  │  │ & Runtime │  │           │  │ & Costs   │  │
│  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  │
│                                                              │
│  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  ┌───────────┐  │
│  │ Routines  │  │ Secrets & │  │ Activity  │  │  Company  │  │
│  │& Schedules│  │  Storage  │  │ & Events  │  │Portability│  │
│  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
         ▲              ▲              ▲              ▲
   ┌─────┴─────┐  ┌─────┴─────┐  ┌─────┴─────┐  ┌─────┴─────┐
   │  Claude   │  │   Codex   │  │   CLI     │  │ HTTP/web  │
   │   Code    │  │           │  │  agents   │  │   bots    │
   └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘  └───────────┘

The Systems

Identity & Access — Two deployment modes (trusted local or authenticated), human roles and permissions, agent API keys, short-lived run JWTs, company memberships, and invite flows. Responsible-user attribution follows work through delegation and supported managed connections.

Org Chart & Agents — Agents have roles, titles, reporting lines, permissions, and budgets. Adapter examples match the diagram: Claude Code, Codex, CLI agents such as Cursor/Gemini/bash, HTTP/webhook bots such as OpenClaw, and external adapter plugins. If it can receive a heartbeat, it's hired.

Work & Task System — Issues carry company/project/goal/parent links, atomic checkout with execution locks, first-class blocker dependencies, comments, documents, attachments, work products, labels, and inbox state. Search across work, review document revisions, and leave anchored feedback.

Heartbeat Execution — DB-backed wakeup queue with coalescing, budget checks, workspace resolution, secret injection, skill loading, and adapter invocation. Runs produce logs, usage records, and adapter-specific session state. Bounded recovery handles supported failures and surfaces cases that need human action.

Workspaces & Runtime — Project repositories and workspaces, optional isolated execution workspaces (git worktrees, operator branches), and runtime services (dev servers, preview URLs). Sandbox providers extend execution beyond the local host; availability depends on the configured environment and adapter.

Governance & Approvals — Board approval workflows, execution policies with review/approval stages, decision tracking, budget hard-stops, and agent pause/resume/terminate. Configured task reviews govern completion; connection action approvals govern calls through the tool gateway.

Budget & Cost Control — Token and cost tracking by company, agent, project, goal, issue, provider, and model. Scoped budget policies with warning thresholds and hard stops. Enforcement uses recorded spend; usage reporting and in-flight work can delay a stop.

Routines & Schedules — Recurring tasks with cron, webhook, and API triggers. Concurrency and catch-up policies. Each routine execution creates a tracked issue and wakes the assigned agent — no manual kick-offs needed.

Plugins — Instance-wide plugin system with out-of-process workers, capability-gated host services, job scheduling, tool exposure, and UI contributions. Extend Paperclip without forking it.

Secrets & Storage — Company secrets and per-person secret values, encrypted credential storage, local or S3-compatible file storage, attachments, and work products. Secret references supply credentials to authorized runs without copying values into ordinary agent configuration.

Activity & Events — Mutating actions, heartbeat state changes, cost events, approvals, comments, and work products are recorded as durable activity so operators can audit what happened and why.

Company Portability — Preview, export, and import organization packages with agents, skills, and optional projects, routines, tasks, and attachments. Referenced secret values are omitted; review packages before sharing because plain environment values and local paths can remain. Packages share an operating setup; full-instance recovery uses backups.


What Paperclip is not

Not just a chatbot. Conversations stay attached to tasks, plans, decisions, and outputs. Experimental Agent Chat can hand work off to assigned tasks.
Not an agent framework. We don't tell you how to build agents. We tell you how to run a company made of them.
Not just a workflow builder. Routines operate within an organization, with roles, goals, budgets, and governance.
Not a prompt manager. Agents bring their own prompts, models, and runtimes. Paperclip manages the organization they work in.
Not limited to one agent. Start with one agent and grow into a team with shared skills, delegation, and review.
Not only for code review. Coding and PR review fit alongside research, operations, content, and other work.

Quickstart

Open source. Self-hosted. No Paperclip account required. Follow the guided quickstart to set up your first agent.

Just ask your agent to install Paperclip

Share the installation guide with your agent.

Or install it yourself

With Node.js 24.11 or newer installed:

npx paperclipai@latest onboard --yes

The CLI runs from npm's cache; your instance configuration and data persist locally.

See the installation guide for managed installs, pinned versions, canary and git-ref installs, updates, rollback, service management, and uninstalling.

For an isolated manual test instance that is already initialized with a CEO agent, use test-drive. It stays in the foreground, never installs a service or creates a first task, and opens the browser only after setup succeeds:

ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=... npx paperclipai test-drive
OPENAI_API_KEY=... npx paperclipai test-drive --harness codex
OPENROUTER_API_KEY=... npx paperclipai test-drive \
  --harness opencode \
  --model openrouter/anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5

Each run without --data-dir gets a unique, retained temporary directory; its absolute path is printed at startup. Pass --data-dir to reuse one, or --no-browser to leave the initialized instance unopened. When invoked from a linked Git worktree, test-drive also enables task execution in that worktree. See the test-drive guide for credential and reuse behavior.

Troubleshooting: private npm registry .npmrc

If this fails with an E404 for paperclipai (or similar) and you use a private npm registry (for example GitHub Packages) via a global ~/.npmrc, npx may be resolving paperclipai against that private registry instead of the public npm registry.

Diagnostic:

npm config get registry

Workaround (cross-platform; force the public npm registry for this command):

npx --registry https://registry.npmjs.org paperclipai@latest onboard --yes

That quickstart path now defaults to trusted local loopback mode for the fastest first run. To start in authenticated/private mode instead, choose a bind preset explicitly:

npx paperclipai@latest onboard --yes --bind lan
# or:
npx paperclipai@latest onboard --yes --bind tailnet

If you already have Paperclip configured, rerunning onboard keeps the existing config in place. Use npx paperclipai configure to edit settings.

Or manually:

git clone https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
cd paperclip
pnpm install
pnpm dev

This starts the UI and API at http://localhost:3100. An embedded PostgreSQL database is created automatically — no setup required.

Requirements: Node.js 24.11+, pnpm 9.15+

Local Claude and Codex subscription sign-in also needs Python 3 and the corresponding provider CLI on the Paperclip host. The Docker image includes them.

Source development also builds the native Paperclip Runner when enabled (the self-hosted default). Install a Rust toolchain, or set PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_BINARY to a compatible prebuilt runner.


FAQ

Q: Is this project maintained or just slop?

A: Paperclip is maintained by the Paperclip team. We've merged over 2,700 pull requests.


Q: What does a typical setup look like?

A: Locally, a single Node.js process manages an embedded Postgres and local file storage. For production, point it at your own Postgres and deploy however you like. Configure projects, agents, and goals — the agents take care of the rest.

For remote access, use authenticated mode with a private-network bind such as Tailscale, or deploy the persistent server with Docker. See deployment modes and the Docker guide.


Q: Can I run multiple companies?

A: Yes. A single deployment can host multiple organizations with company-scoped data and access checks.


Q: How is Paperclip different from agents like OpenClaw or Claude Code?

A: Paperclip uses those agents. It orchestrates them into a company — with org charts, budgets, goals, governance, and accountability.


Q: Why should I use Paperclip instead of just pointing my OpenClaw to Asana or Trello?

A: Agent orchestration has subtleties in how you coordinate who has work checked out, how to maintain sessions, monitoring costs, establishing governance - Paperclip does this for you.

(Bring-your-own-ticket-system is on the Roadmap)


Q: Do agents run continuously?

A: Agents wake for assigned work and follow-up messages. Optional timer heartbeats let them check for work periodically; routines create recurring tasks on their own schedules. You can also connect externally running agents such as OpenClaw. A mention alone does not assign work or wake another agent.


Development

pnpm dev              # Full dev (API + UI, watch mode)
pnpm dev:once         # Full dev without file watching
pnpm dev:server       # Server only
pnpm dev:mobile       # Serve prebuilt UI on :3101 for phones/tablets (proxies /api → :3100)
pnpm dev:both         # Run `pnpm dev` and `pnpm dev:mobile` together
pnpm build            # Build all
pnpm typecheck        # Type checking
pnpm test             # Cheap default test run (Vitest only)
pnpm test:watch       # Vitest watch mode
pnpm test:e2e         # Playwright browser suite
pnpm db:generate      # Generate DB migration
pnpm db:migrate       # Apply migrations

pnpm test does not run Playwright. Browser suites stay separate and are typically run only when working on those flows or in CI.

See doc/DEVELOPING.md for the full development guide.


Roadmap

  • ✅ Plugin system (e.g. add a knowledge base, custom tracing, queues, etc)
  • ✅ Get OpenClaw / claw-style agent employees
  • ✅ companies.sh - import and export entire organizations
  • ✅ Easy AGENTS.md configurations
  • ✅ Skills Manager, Skill Studio & Skills Store
  • ✅ Scheduled Routines
  • ✅ Better Budgeting
  • ✅ Agent Reviews and Approvals
  • ✅ Multiple Human Users
  • ✅ Cloud / Sandbox agents (e2b, Cloudflare, Daytona, Modal, Novita, boxd, self-hosted Kubernetes)
  • ✅ Artifacts & Work Products
  • ✅ Deep Planning (planning mode, revisioned plans, plan approvals)
  • ✅ Enforced Outcomes (watchdogs, recovery actions, review gates)
  • ✅ MCP Tool Gateway & Apps (governed tool access)
  • ✅ Secrets Manager with per-agent access
  • ✅ Activity log & action attribution
  • ✅ Self-healing runs & automatic recovery
  • ✅ Agent evals & feedback
  • ✅ Connected Apps
  • ✅ Personal & Shared AI Accounts
  • ✅ Shared Agents Use Personal GitHub Identities
  • ✅ Skill Version History & Restore
  • ✅ Document Comments & Revision History
  • ✅ Company-Wide Search
  • ✅ Multi-Model & Multi-Harness Teams
  • 🟡 Memory / Knowledge
  • ⚪ MAXIMIZER MODE
  • ⚪ Work Queues
  • ⚪ Self-Organization
  • ⚪ Automatic Organizational Learning
  • 🟡 Agent Chat
  • 🟡 Cloud deployments
  • ⚪ Desktop App
  • ⚪ Bring-your-own-ticket-system (Asana / Linear / Jira as on-ramps)

This is the short roadmap preview. See the full roadmap in ROADMAP.md.


Community & Plugins

Find Plugins and more at awesome-paperclip

Observability

Paperclip ships with opt-in OpenTelemetry auto-instrumentation for the server (traces only). It activates when OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_ENDPOINT is set and supports grpc, http/protobuf, and http/json via the standard OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_PROTOCOL env var. @opentelemetry/api is a normal server dependency; the SDK, auto-instrumentation, and exporter packages are optional peer dependencies — install them only if you want tracing. See doc/observability.md for install commands and the full env-var reference.

Paperclip also ships with opt-in Sentry error monitoring for the server and the browser. Set SENTRY_DSN_FRONTEND to activate it for the browser and SENTRY_DSN_BACKEND to activate it for the server — each variable is optional, and the legacy SENTRY_DSN variable still works as a fallback for either component. The supported server SDK version is @sentry/node@10.71.0; it is an optional peer dependency for the server, so install it only if you want error monitoring. The browser SDK, @sentry/browser, is pinned to the same exact version. See doc/observability.md for the install command, the privacy settings, and the full default capture set.

Telemetry

Paperclip collects anonymous usage telemetry to help us understand how the product is used and improve it. No personal information, issue content, prompts, file paths, or secrets are ever collected. Private repository references are hashed with a per-install salt before being sent.

Contributors changing emitted telemetry events should follow the Telemetry Data Contract. For proposed first-party events that are not in the generated contract yet, follow Telemetry Workflow.

Telemetry is enabled by default and can be disabled with any of the following:

Method How
Environment variable PAPERCLIP_TELEMETRY_DISABLED=1
Standard convention DO_NOT_TRACK=1
CI environments Automatically disabled when CI=true
Config file Set telemetry.enabled: false in your Paperclip config

Contributing

We welcome contributions. See the contributing guide for details.

We're hiring


Community


License

MIT © 2026 Paperclip Labs, Inc

Star History

Star History Chart

Open source under MIT. Built for people who want to get work done, not babysit agents.

S
Description
No description provided
Readme MIT
2.1 GiB
0 Stars 1 Watchers 0 Forks
Languages
TypeScript 92.3%
JavaScript 3.8%
Rust 2.6%
Python 0.4%
CSS 0.4%
Other 0.3%