2223b7de9e perf(ci): stop building the standalone packages inside the public-install verifier (#15908)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Every pull request runs the `Build` check. Its last step is the
public npm install verifier, `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`,
which stages the eighteen public packages reachable from the server and
the CLI, packs them, and installs them in a clean consumer.
> - Before it stages anything, the verifier runs
`scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`. That script installs and
compiles the seven sandbox-provider plugins that live outside the pnpm
workspace: one network `pnpm install --ignore-workspace` and one `tsc`
per plugin. The line was copied from the build block of `release.sh`
when the verifier was written in #14024.
> - release.sh needs that build because it publishes those plugins. The
verifier does not for anything it stages. Its package closure follows
`workspace:` specs from the server and the CLI, and a `workspace:` spec
can only name a workspace package, so none of the eighteen packages it
packs is a standalone package and no tarball reads that build's output.
> - One optional path at the end of the verifier does read it:
qualification-package retention, which `docker-runner-check.yml` enables
with `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` after running only
`pnpm build`, packs the Daytona plugin from its `dist`. The PR `Build`
job never sets that variable.
> - The timing line from #15868 and #15888 puts the verifier's staging
phase at 75.8s on the latest run, of which the staged sources, the
bundled installs and the packs account for 46.5s. The rest, about 29s,
is the work before staging, and the standalone build is almost all of
it. `Build` at 433-530s is the slowest check in most PR runs once the
server shards drop, so that time sits on the run's critical path.
> - This pull request runs the standalone build only when retention is
requested, keeps the `ui-dist` copy the server package needs, and times
both on the timing line so what is left before staging is visible.
> - The benefit is a `Build` job about 21-28s shorter, with no change to
what the verifier installs or checks, no loss of coverage for the
standalone build because Canary Dry Run still runs it through
`release.sh`, and no change to the retention path that reads it.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Replaces #15892, which GitHub closed automatically when the branch of
#15888 (its base at the time) was deleted on merge. Same two commits,
rebased onto `master` on top of #15888 (1ac48aff), #15868 (026bdcd0) and
#15861 (85f4205d), which are all merged. #15892 reached Greptile 5/5
with every check green on the same content; the review history is there.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

The `Build` PR check. Its public npm install verifier builds the seven
standalone sandbox-provider plugins before it stages the eighteen
packages it installs, and none of those packages uses that build.

**Subsystem affected**

CI and release scripts (`scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`,
`scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`).

**Current behavior**

The verifier runs `node scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`
and then `bash scripts/prepare-server-ui-dist.sh` before it stages any
package, on every run. The first script removes each sandbox-provider
plugin's `node_modules`, runs `pnpm install --ignore-workspace` against
the registry, links the in-repo plugin SDK, and runs the plugin's `tsc`
build, four plugins at a time. On the last `Build` run before this
change
([38146108750](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38146108750))
`stage_packages_ms` was 75.8s and the staged sources, bundled installs
and packs inside it took 0.9s, 15.7s and 29.9s, which leaves about 29s
before staging. The verifier's package closure, computed in the same way
as the script computes it, contains eighteen workspace packages and no
sandbox-provider plugin.

**Proposed behavior**

Run the standalone build only when
`PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` is set, because that is
the one path that reads it, and report it as `stage_standalone_build_ms`
when it runs. Always run the `ui-dist` copy before staging. With
`PAPERCLIP_RELEASE_REUSE_UI_DIST=1`, which the verifier already sets,
that copies the `ui/dist` that `pnpm build` produced into
`server/ui-dist`, which the server package publishes. Report that copy
as `stage_ui_dist_ms` on the timing line. Leave `release.sh` unchanged,
so the release flow and Canary Dry Run still build the standalone
packages where they are published.

**Reason and benefit**

The verifier proves that the eighteen public packages install cleanly
from the public registry. The standalone build adds seven network
installs and compiles whose output is never packed. Removing it from the
PR path shortens the staging phase by about 21-28s. Measured on this
PR's first commit
([38150787810](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38150787810)):
`stage_packages_ms` 54.2s against 75.8s, with `stage_ui_dist_ms` 21ms,
and the time before staging, `stage_packages_ms` minus the four staging
keys, down from about 29s to under 0.1s.

**Breaking changes**

None. The same eighteen packages are staged, packed, checked and
installed from the same sources. The retention path builds exactly what
it built before. `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` exports
two existing helpers for the new guard test and otherwise does not
change.

## What Changed

- `scripts/verify-grok-npm-install.mjs`: the
`build-standalone-public-packages.mjs` call before staging runs only
when `PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` is set, in the same
position as before, and reports `stage_standalone_build_ms`. The flag is
read once into `retainQualificationPackages`, and the retention call at
the end is gated by the same variable, so the build and the retention
that reads it cannot diverge. The `prepare-server-ui-dist.sh` call
stays, is timed, and reports `stage_ui_dist_ms`. The comment explains
why release.sh and the retention path need the standalone build and the
staged packages do not. The timing-line comment lists both new keys.
- `scripts/build-standalone-public-packages.mjs`:
`parseWorkspaceEntries` and `isWorkspacePackage` are exported. No
behavior change.
- `scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs`: one new
guard test. It asserts the verifier references the standalone build
exactly once, inside the retention gate, timed under its own key, and
that no second reading of the retention variable exists; that
`retain-runner-qualification-packages.mjs` still packs the Daytona
plugin from its `dist`, and that the Daytona plugin is a standalone
package, so the gate cannot pass vacuously; recomputes the verifier's
package closure from `release-package-map.mjs list` and the manifests
through `workspace:` specs; checks that the public package map still
carries packages outside the pnpm workspace; checks that every package
in the closure is inside the workspace globs of `pnpm-workspace.yaml`;
checks that the server package still publishes `ui-dist`; and checks the
order: closure, gated standalone build, `ui-dist` copy, then staging,
with the reuse flag set and the timing keys written.

### Review fix, second commit

Greptile's P1 on the first commit was valid: `docker-runner-check.yml`
runs `pnpm build` and then the verifier with
`PAPERCLIP_RUNNER_QUALIFICATION_PACKAGES_DIR` set, and
`retainRunnerQualificationPackages` copies
`packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/dist`. The Daytona plugin is
excluded from the pnpm workspace, so `pnpm build` never produces that
directory and the first commit would have failed that job with `ENOENT`
after every install check had passed. The second commit restores the
build on exactly that path: the verifier builds the standalone packages
when, and only when, retention is requested, and the guard test pins the
gate to the reason for it.

## Verification

- `node --test scripts/__tests__/grok-public-install-sandbox.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/pack-staged-packages.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/stage-bundled-packages.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/prefetch-child.test.mjs
scripts/__tests__/retain-runner-qualification-packages.test.mjs`: 37
tests pass.
- The updated guard test fails against the first commit's verifier (no
retention gate around the build) and passes with the second commit. The
first commit's test failed against #15888's verifier the same way.
- `node --check` passes on the verifier.
- The verifier itself needs Docker and a network, which this workspace
does not have. The first commit's `Build` job
([38150787810](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38150787810))
ran the branch's verifier and measured the saving: `stage_packages_ms`
54.2s (was 75.8s), `stage_ui_dist_ms` 21ms, `stage_sources_ms` 0.8s,
`stage_bundled_ms` 21.0s, `stage_pack_ms` 32.4s, so under 0.1s remains
before staging where about 29s was. The second commit does not change
the PR path: the gate is false on every PR run, so that job's timing
line should show the same shape with no `stage_standalone_build_ms` key.
- The retention path was not run here: it needs Docker and the
`docker-runner-check` workflow's inputs. The code on that path is the
same `run(process.execPath, [...build-standalone-public-packages.mjs])`
call the verifier made before this PR, in the same position.
- `scripts/__tests__/release-dry-run-notes.test.mjs` exercises the
standalone build inside `release.sh` and is unchanged; 11 of its 12
tests spawn `pnpm`, which is not installed in this workspace, and fail
the same way on #15888's head. They pass in CI, where `pnpm` is
installed.
- The first commit's run failed only on `General tests (server
(11/12))`: all 74 files and 1257 tests passed, then Vitest caught a
teardown `EACCES` removing the per-worker `PAPERCLIP_HOME` under
`native-session-resumption.test.ts`, the same error as the first attempt
of #15888's run 38146108750. Neither PR touches server code; the failure
is noted on the tracking issue.

## Risks

- If a future change makes a package the verifier installs depend on a
standalone package, the verifier would stage an unbuilt `dist`. That
cannot happen through a `workspace:` spec, which is the only kind the
closure follows, and the guard test fails if the closure ever contains a
package outside the workspace globs.
- If a future path in the verifier reads a standalone build without
setting the retention variable, it would see no `dist`. The guard test
pins the single reference to the gate; a new reader has to extend the
gate and the test together.
- The sandbox-provider plugins' builds are no longer exercised on every
PR by the `Build` job. They are still built by `release.sh` in Canary
Dry Run on every PR, by the verifier whenever retention is requested,
and the `build-standalone-concurrency` and `release-dry-run-notes` tests
still cover the script.
- Low risk otherwise. The bundled installs, the packs, the consumer
install, and every probe are unchanged.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap
first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

- Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, run as a
Paperclip agent through the Claude Code local adapter with tool use
(shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). Reasoning mode: extended thinking.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with 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 and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green (CI is running on the second
commit)
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
(the P1 on the first commit is fixed in the second; re-review pending)
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

---------

Co-authored-by: Bender (Fable) <bender-fable@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-11 12:14:32 -07:00
…
…
…

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 and experimental pipelines 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, 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 GiB
0 Stars 1 Watchers 0 Forks
Languages
TypeScript 92.5%
JavaScript 3.4%
Rust 2.9%
Shell 0.4%
Python 0.3%
Other 0.3%