DottaandPaperclip
44c60c7221
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Automatic skill sources check upstream every five minutes. > - The domain deadline contract can hand future work to a durable wake alarm. > - A saved deadline or a worker unit test does not prove that a stopped tenant resumes the real producer. > - This pull request checks the default cadence through the actual app and a matching service checkout. > - It checks two cold starts and three distinct persisted skill revisions with real clocks. > - The benefit is repeatable local evidence without changing production timing or authority. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs: #19001, #17008, #17923. This is a test and documentation follow-up to #19001. #19001 is now merged; this PR targets master. Feature code remains in that merged foundation. #17008 covers the earlier source worker change. #17923 covers separate skill-cache retention; this PR does not change that behavior. A scoped search of public PRs and issues found no duplicate default-cadence cold-cycle acceptance test. No matching public issue was found. The enhancement fields follow. **Pre-submission checklist** This improves checks for an existing feature. It adds no product endpoint or execution authority. The public related-work search is complete. **What existing behavior does this improve?** Verification of automatic skill-source updates across a durable idle handoff and cold restart. **Subsystem affected** `server/` test fixtures and development documentation. **Current behavior** Domain tests cover claims, access and future deadlines. They do not prove the full default-300-second path from ordinary source attachment through signed tenant reports, durable alarms, stopped compute and a changed persisted skill. **Proposed behavior** An opt-in launcher checks bootstrap first, then two full real-clock cycles. Ordinary CI can run the transport controls without the host fixture. The launcher-specific worker assertion runs only when prewire is requested, and fails closed in that lane. **Reason and benefit** The test can detect an early refresh, a lost deadline, a stale proof, an ACK after physical stop, a failed cold restart or a producer that does not publish changed contents. **Breaking changes** None to product APIs, schema, cadence, authorization, claims or retry policy. Existing maintenance-helper defaults stay unchanged. **Additional context** The opt-in host flow needs an authorized matching service checkout, its normal compiled acceptance bridge, Node 22 and two owned PostgreSQL test databases. The standalone controls do not need that service or PostgreSQL. Roadmap review places this under existing Skills Manager and Cloud deployment verification, not a new core feature. ## What Changed - Add an opt-in default-cadence acceptance test and checked-in launcher. - Reuse real server startup, managed tenant authority and the ordinary project attachment route. Control only the remote Git snapshot boundary; keep actual authorization, scanning, claims and publication. - Use actual signed tenant routes and the matching service's gate, sleep controller and PostgreSQL wake-alarm store. Stop and restart real app children through a controlled local provider. - Preload the Node transport guard before coordinator, worker and child module work. Check worker-local and child PID, thread and source-hash receipts. Keep caught unexpected transport attempts fatal. - Require both persisted refresh times and actual upstream handler timestamps to be at or after each original deadline. - Join physical callbacks during bridge close, stop a late wake-created child, and preserve the original cleanup budget. Add a real IPC/HTTP-child counterfactual. - Accept valid owned HTTP options paths without allowing Unix sockets or unknown origins. Remove the unused App helper export. - Add finite transport and launcher controls. Defer only the launcher-specific parent assertion in vanilla CI. Keep all subprocess controls default-runnable. - Add optional child entry, preload and bounded pool settings to the existing test helper. Preserve its defaults and the real observer test body. - Remove added explanatory comments under the contribution policy. Preserve executable syntax, directives and literals. - Document pinned setup, fresh owned databases, bootstrap and full two-cycle commands in `doc/DEVELOPING.md`. The diff against the intended base contains nine test/helper/launcher files and this one document. It adds no production feature code or Cloud source to the App repository. ## Verification The latest two-file CI repair preserves both original failed jobs. A newer master workflow introduced two required step inputs absent from its extracted-step test environment; the faithful false/false inputs now pass all five existing target-authorization cases, after an actual missing-input counterfactual failed. A controlled socket case also reproduces legal reuse of the released runner port; the fixture now holds that reservation until the preview binds, releases it in finally, and asserts distinct ports. All original retry/result/accounting assertions and timeouts stay unchanged. The original Linux listener owner remains unknown; the control proves this fixture collision mechanism, not that original attribution. Fresh current-head full CI and complete reviews are pending. Current merge-integration candidate: `f6f686103b7bfd0a4ab83085634c622af3896ecb`, a normal merge after #19001 landed, including actual master `1c9767d323cf872a266962b9e6b4bd5cbcb57f1c`. All nine acceptance code files are byte-identical to148a82e5; both parents' documentation additions survive. Every other path equals actual master. The only conflict was the old foundation's startup block; current master was retained in full. Fresh exact-head CI and complete reviews are pending. The local measurements below belong to their explicitly named revisions; no fresh full614-second run is claimed. Current candidate: `148a82e54c502759785407357001c6b50c1439dd`, normally carrying the current base `8c912e1ba4fc66397a7341ade59373af8075068f`. All nine acceptance code blobs remain identical to qualified repair `e092746f4da181c8414c63be71474619a84b97e7`; documentation retains both parents. The matching built service for the fresh bootstrap is `389878364b42dd129835d263f91882c5774d5123`, using Node 22.23.4. The App uses Node 24.22.2 and pnpm 9.15.4. Use the exact controlled setup and commands in [doc/DEVELOPING.md](doc/DEVELOPING.md#controlled-default-cadence-sleep-acceptance). Fresh owned databases and the matching compiled service are prerequisites; the launcher does not create a cluster or build dependencies. - **Current affected semantic check passed**, using actual native TypeScript 7 and the current generated CI options/references (0.640 seconds). Normal declaration references passed in 11.726 seconds, with source-matched SDK/shared/kernel/Runner prerequisites and the frozen current lockfile. - **Current guarded controls: 44 passed**, plus the same single explicit real-PG observer deferral, in 4.790 seconds. The executing worker checked its own global PID/thread/preload source hash and matching receipt. Guard hash: `7daf9ae7d2f26e8fcd389b1d560fac1d4e218a8304a2c58e49f646af108165bc`. No unexpected attempts or PG sockets occurred. Vanilla controls on the identical repair files passed 22 cases with one explicit launcher-parent assertion deferral (2.044 seconds). - **Real cleanup counterfactual:** unchanged old helper failed the actual endpoint assertion in 1.568 seconds: its late HTTP child remained reachable after close returned. The same fixed-helper case passed in 1.485 seconds: close waited, the child exited, the port was unreachable and no IPC error occurred. The isolated driver records only the known legacy closed-IPC error long enough to inspect cleanup; current helper requires zero such errors. All recorded processes and ports were independently checked empty. - **Fresh current bootstrap passed once**, 16.159 seconds wall / 14.12 seconds Vitest / 12.237 seconds body. The ordinary enabled producer persisted useful revision 1, cleared its lease and retained exactly 300,000 ms between success and original next deadline. A signed current-generation report produced the matching generation/operation-lock SQL ACK before physical child stop (ACK 06:54:02.020 UTC; stop signal 06:54:02.025 UTC). The alarm retained the original D and D-120 eligibility. Both fixture databases ended with zero sessions; the coordinator independently audited and normally removed them. This bootstrap does not execute a due wake or the new v2/v3 timing assertions. - **Historical full two-cycle result remains 1/1 passed in 614.213 seconds wall**, at measured App `74f7c012ca17ad0d7302d76403f5033affb1430b` and service `2cb54f904031dcf69a32902cd853b43f74d6f301`. Two new processes published distinct immutable v2/v3 at original D+115 ms and D+98 ms. Exact signed SQL ACKs preceded both physical stops; real SQL D-120 claims caused both cold starts. Features, claims and original business deadlines stayed unchanged. - Both historical 10.002-second quiet windows kept app SQL, upstream and outgoing HTTP counts unchanged. Two awake PG sockets remained. Quiet counts do not mean all connections closed. - The stronger timing checks are additional assertions, not retroactively executed results. Offline inspection of the original receipts confirms persisted successes at D+115/+98 ms and earliest upstream handler entries at D+44/+30 ms; all five requests in each refresh group started after D. The exact new pre-sleep request counter and dispatch-before-handler time were not independently recorded historically. - Source review found 19 critical automatic Git producer/runtime files identical to the measured App. The current active cache helper change does not run on automatic Git publication and adds no pool. The matching service carries unchanged measured helper/sleep/controller/alarm seams through its normal master merge. The current bootstrap and focused controls qualify the changed cleanup/guard and parent integration. No fresh current-head 614-second pass or whole-tree identity is claimed. - Runtime is serialized: worker 1, per-pool limits at most 4, configured App potential 10 + shared service pool 2 + one observer against server max 40. Current bootstrap point samples observed at most 3 owned clients plus the observer; those samples are not a continuous aggregate peak. App/service guard peaks were 2 each, with zero remaining sockets at cleanup. Failures remain accounted for. The first historical bootstrap cleanup masked an unknown primary error. Later attempts exposed missing fixture-owned domain metadata and lost origin snapshots; test-only ownership/cleanup corrections preserved the original assertions and timeouts. The new causal driver first lacked a final observation, then encountered sandbox bind EPERM, then exposed the old closed-IPC error; only the final real endpoint failure above is labeled the cleanup counterfactual. An offline dependency miss and a generator-cleared ignored compiler config were retained and corrected without weakening compiler options. The former inherited policy failure (397 findings) is resolved by the genuine current-master base/scanner, with zero findings and seven scanner tests; no unrelated UI site was edited and the gate was not relaxed. Historical real TCP observer coverage passed 1/1 in 3.688 seconds. Comment-only and opt-in-selection carries remain documented in prior evidence; self-hash changes are metadata exceptions with fresh executing-worker checks. The full workspace typecheck, test, build and browser commands were not run locally for this test-only slice. The current base passes its full exact-head CI and Greptile 5/5; this leaf now has all 56 exact-head check runs terminal (54 success, one neutral, one skip), the additional legacy security status passing, complete current Greptile 5/5 and Ponytail 5/5 reviews, and all four review threads resolved across all pages. No live provider or deployed host/database suspension was exercised. ## Risks - The host test requires a matching service checkout and compiled bridge. An unrelated service revision is not a valid substitute. - Controlled localhost Git, S3 and physical process operations do not qualify deployed Railway or Neon suspension, external permissions or provider uncertainty. - The Node guard does not prove native subprocess transport isolation. Only finite local Git metadata and Node version commands were needed. - Two short SQL/HTTP quiet windows do not establish strict 90-second host acceptance. Separate plugin-host LISTEN, MCP wake and other domain gaps remain open. - Explicit test URLs are destructive fixture inputs. Use fresh, owned `_test` databases. The launcher does not start a cluster or choose a database implicitly. - Passing CI and review do not qualify deployed suspension; the current proof boundaries above still apply. > For core feature work, check `ROADMAP.md` first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. This PR adds verification to the existing feature in its base. ## Model Used OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` assisted with implementation, repository review and local code execution. OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, performed managing review and integration. The context-window sizes and exact served backend snapshots were not exposed. ## 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 and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id - [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 — fresh merge-head gates pending - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups — fresh merge-head review pending - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge ### Current master reconciliation (2026-11-06) Merged actual master `e28158b353fd274f0322be76d62cd223e0df599f` normally. All nine qualified acceptance code files and the held-port repair remain byte-identical. Upstream independently landed the workflow input fix in #19602; the fixture now uses that exact upstream version once, avoiding duplicate object keys in a squash merge. All other master changes are preserved. The earlier two-cycle local evidence remains source-specific; no fresh 614-second run or deployed suspension is claimed. This new head requires fresh CI and bot reviews. ### Actual combined-tree typecheck failure and repair CI job `128156887548` failed with TS1117 at workflow-target.test.ts:22: two independently landed master fixes declared the same `IMAGE_ONLY` and `TESTOPS_REQUESTED` keys. The complete original log is retained. A further normal master merge now removes the duplicate declarations, retaining exactly one false/false pair and every original assertion. All nine qualified acceptance code paths and the held-port repair remain byte-identical; unrelated master changes are preserved. This is a concrete compiler failure and source repair, with fresh exact-head CI/reviews required. --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Quickstart · Docs · GitHub · Discord · Twitter · Website
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 |
 Claude Code |
 Codex |
 Cursor + Cloud |
 Gemini CLI |
 OpenCode |
 Pi |
 Hermes + Gateway |
 Grok Build |
 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.
| 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 AgentAny agent, any runtime, one org chart. If it can receive a heartbeat, it's hired. |
🎯 Goal AlignmentLink tasks and projects to your organization goals. Agents receive the goal context behind their work. |
💓 HeartbeatsAgents wake for assigned work, follow-up messages, or configured schedules. Delegation flows up and down the org chart. |
💰 Cost ControlCompany, agent, and project budgets. Track reported spend, get threshold alerts, and pause work at configured limits. |
🏢 Multi-OrganizationOne deployment, many organizations. Separate tasks, agents, permissions, and activity histories for each. |
🎫 Task ThreadsKeep conversations, plans, blockers, files, and run history attached to the work. Assign tasks to agents or people. |
🛡️ GovernanceConfigure review and approval stages, approve hires, and pause, reassign, or stop work when needed. |
📊 Org ChartHierarchies, roles, reporting lines. Your agents have a boss, a title, and a job description. |
📱 Mobile ReadyMonitor and manage your autonomous businesses from anywhere. |
🔗 Apps & ConnectionsConnect services such as GitHub, Notion, and Railway, or your own MCP server. Set gateway actions to Allowed, Ask first, or Off. |
👥 Shared Agents, Personal AccountsChoose 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 StudioInstall or write shared skills, test them with saved inputs, inspect results, and restore earlier versions. |
📅 Scheduled RoutinesRun recurring work on a schedule or trigger it through an API or webhook. Each run has a task, an owner, and a history. |
📎 Artifacts & FeedbackFind the files and documents agents produce. Preview supported formats and leave comments on specific passages in documents. |
📦 Ready-Made TeamsPreview 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
.npmrcIf this fails with an
E404forpaperclipai(or similar) and you use a private npm registry (for example GitHub Packages) via a global~/.npmrc,npxmay be resolvingpaperclipaiagainst that private registry instead of the public npm registry.Diagnostic:
npm config get registryWorkaround (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.
Community
- Discord — Join the community
- Twitter / X — Follow updates and announcements
- GitHub Issues — bugs and feature requests
- GitHub Discussions — ideas and RFC
License
MIT © 2026 Paperclip Labs, Inc
Star History
Open source under MIT. Built for people who want to get work done, not babysit agents.