DottaandClaude Fable 5.2 76da2fec4f perf(runner): deliver transport events when they arrive instead of polling every 5 ms (#20862)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server runs each native agent session through a runner
transport. The transport reads the events that the runner commits to the
session's control plane and delivers them to the driver.
> - The transport found those events with a timer. Every live transport
ran a pass every 5 ms, for as long as the session was open, whether or
not an event had arrived.
> - A CPU profile of the staging server shows the cost. The main thread
was at 96% of one core, and this pass used 5.6% of it with about a dozen
live sessions. The cost grows with the number of sessions and never
stops.
> - The same timer also delayed every event. An event waited up to 5 ms
for the next pass before the driver saw it. Agent boot time and time to
first token are measured requirements.
> - This pull request makes the control plane tell the transport when a
reader can see a change, and the transport delivers in the next task.
The fixed timer is gone.
> - The benefit is that an open session with nothing to deliver costs
nothing on the main thread, and an event reaches the driver sooner than
before.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

No public issue exists. The problem is described here.

**What happened?**

The server's main thread on a hosted instance stayed at 96% of one core,
so every request and every agent turn waited behind it. A 30 second CPU
profile of the live server (Node 24, about a dozen live native agent
sessions) attributes 5.6% of the main thread to `#pumpEventsSafely` and
4.7% self time to `#pumpEvents` in
`packages/paperclip-runner/src/live/runnerd-codex-transport.ts`. Three
places started `setInterval(() => this.#pumpEventsSafely(), 5)`. Each
pass scans the session's committed-event window, so the cost is
`sessions x 200 passes per second x window size`, with nothing to
deliver.

**Expected behavior**

An open session that has no event to deliver does no periodic work. An
event that arrives is delivered at once, not at the next timer tick.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. `cd packages/paperclip-runner`
2. `PAPERCLIP_TRANSPORT_PUMP_BENCHMARK=1 pnpm exec vitest run
src/live/runnerd-transport-pump.benchmark.test.ts`
3. Read the `TRANSPORT_PUMP_BENCHMARK` lines.
`stateReadsPerSessionPerSecond` counts how often an open, idle transport
reads the control plane. `deliveryWaitMs` is the time from the moment a
reader can see a committed event to the moment the transport delivers
it.

**Paperclip version or commit**

Present on master at `c8ae02e5ce`. The profile is from `556b249897`.

**Deployment mode**

Hosted server with native agent sessions. The same code runs in local
development.

## What Changed

- `DurablePrpControlPlane` has a new `onReadableStateChange(listener)`.
It fires when the state that a reader of `store` can see may have
changed. The control plane calls it after every stored-state replacement
or save, after a saved checkpoint releases events that were waiting for
it, and after an authenticated runner moves the recovered cursor.
- The transport subscribes when it creates its control plane. A change
wakes one delivery pass in the next task (`setImmediate`). The pass
never runs inside the control plane's own commit, and several changes in
one task share one pass. This keeps the existing order: the control
plane finishes its commit before a reader reacts.
- The three `setInterval(..., 5)` timers are gone. `#startPump` and
`#stopPump` replace them and keep the same lifecycle: the pump runs from
session start, and it stops on release, controller retirement, failure,
and close.
- The delivery pass now reports what it left behind. Events that the
transport holds back itself (a pending turn start, a pending recovery
binding, a trace write that must be retried) are retried every 5 ms, as
before, and only while they are held. This is the only timer that
remains.
- A pass that stops after it exposes `turn/started` (so the driver can
bind the turn first) now continues in the next task. Before, the events
after it waited for the next 5 ms tick.
- `attachRun` wakes the pump when it moves the transport to the new run
identity.
- New regression test `src/live/runnerd-codex-transport-pump.test.ts`,
new opt-in benchmark
`src/live/runnerd-transport-pump.benchmark.test.ts`, a paced provider
fixture, and a test-only probe that records when each committed event
becomes readable.

How this meets `rules/sleep-aware-background-work.mdc`:

| Item | Answer |
| --- | --- |
| Trigger | The control plane's readable-state change. No timer. |
| Source of truth | The control plane's committed-event window and the
transport's delivery cursor. A notification is a hint to look at them. |
| Pending-work predicate | The pass returns `held` or `next_task`, or a
trace write is waiting. |
| Next deadline or retry | 5 ms, only while the predicate is true.
`next_task` uses one `setImmediate`. |
| Quiet condition | Nothing is held. Then the transport has no timer and
no scheduled task. Release, retirement, failure, and close stop it
completely. |

## Verification

**Reproduction and before/after measurement**

Run from `packages/paperclip-runner`:

```sh
PAPERCLIP_TRANSPORT_PUMP_BENCHMARK=1 pnpm exec vitest run src/live/runnerd-transport-pump.benchmark.test.ts
```

The benchmark opens 12 real transports against `runnerd` and a
credential-free provider fixture. It measures the open sessions while
nothing arrives. Then all 12 sessions stream one turn at the same time
(40 events each, one every 15 ms). "Before" is the unchanged source at
`e2cf9a670f`, which was the base of this branch when the measurements
were taken. "After" is this change on that base. Each cell shows two
runs, and the runs alternate between before and after. The host was a
shared macOS arm64 machine with other work running (load average 8 to
10), so absolute numbers carry that noise.

External checkpoint persistence. This is the mode that the server uses.

| Measure | Before | After |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Idle: control-plane state reads per session per second | 364 / 365 | 0
/ 0 |
| Idle: event-loop utilization, 12 new sessions | 1.5% / 1.5% | 0.0% /
0.0% |
| Idle: event-loop utilization, 49 retained events per session | 2.1% /
2.2% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| Idle: process CPU, 49 retained events per session | 12.8 / 11.8 ms per
second | 0.05 / 0.04 ms per second |
| Delivery wait, mean (480 events) | 3.48 / 4.22 ms | 1.91 / 1.81 ms |
| Delivery wait, p50 | 3.16 / 3.97 ms | 0.83 / 0.58 ms |
| Delivery wait, p95 | 7.78 / 8.49 ms | 6.36 / 7.47 ms |
| Delivery wait, max | 8.84 / 9.23 ms | 9.07 / 8.86 ms |
| Delivery wait of the turn's terminal event, p50 | 2.37 / 2.58 ms |
0.08 / 0.05 ms |

The idle cost grows with the retained event window, as the profile
predicts. With `PAPERCLIP_TRANSPORT_PUMP_DELTAS=400` (409 retained
events per session, one run each): idle event-loop utilization 3.4%
before and 0.0% after, idle process CPU 21.5 ms per second before and
0.08 after. Delivery wait in that run: mean 5.93 ms before and 3.55 ms
after, p95 16.27 ms before and 8.03 ms after, max 66.94 ms before and
14.04 ms after.

Delivery wait is the time from the moment a reader can see a committed
event to the moment the transport hands it to the driver. It is equal or
better at every point. The p95 and the max did not move much. They
belong to the first events of each turn, which wait for the turn start
response. That wait is a separate 10 ms poll (`waitForRunnerCommand`),
and this pull request does not change it.

File persistence (the local journal, which writes and syncs on the main
thread):

| Measure | Before | After |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Idle: state reads per session per second | 363 / 364 | 0 / 0 |
| Delivery wait, 12 sessions, mean | 10.33 / 13.76 ms | 11.88 / 12.73 ms
|
| Delivery wait, 12 sessions, p50 | 6.04 / 6.87 ms | 6.34 / 6.20 ms |
| Delivery wait, 4 sessions and 400 events each, mean | 4.75 ms | 2.39
ms |
| Delivery wait, 4 sessions and 400 events each, p50 / p95 | 0.07 /
22.99 ms | 0.06 / 11.80 ms |

With 12 sessions the file journal saturates the main thread with its own
synchronous writes, and the wait is the time behind those writes. Three
more before-runs of that case gave means of 9.0, 14.0 and 20.2 ms, so
the two columns are the same within the noise. With 4 sessions the
journal does not saturate and the after column is better.

**Regression test (red, then green)**

```sh
pnpm exec vitest run src/live/runnerd-codex-transport-pump.test.ts
```

- `stops looking for events while an open session has none to deliver`
(file and external persistence). On the unchanged source: `expected 708
to be less than 100` and `expected 732 to be less than 100` state reads
in a 2 second idle window. With the fix: pass.
- `delivers each committed event in the next task, without a timer tick`
(file and external persistence). The test freezes every interval timer,
runs a full turn, and checks that each event is delivered before a task
that the test queues at the moment the event becomes readable. This is
an order check and does not depend on the speed of the host. On the
unchanged source: `the turn's events were delivered without a periodic
poll: expected false to be true`. With the fix: pass.
- Result: 4 of 4 failed on the unchanged source, 4 of 4 passed three
times with the fix, and 4 of 4 passed again after the rebase.

**Other local checks**

- `node ./node_modules/typescript/bin/tsc -p tsconfig.json --noEmit` and
`-p tsconfig.test.json --noEmit` in `packages/paperclip-runner`: pass on
the rebased commit.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/live/runnerd-codex-transport` (15 files, 455
tests). These suites cover attachment, recovery, warm transition,
suspension, and release and resume on real `runnerd` processes. Before
the rebase, on a quieter host: all passed. On the rebased commit, at a
host load average of 15 to 20: 454 passed and 1 failed. The failure is
the terminal-replay row that is described below.
- `pnpm exec vitest run src/live src/control-plane
src/native-session-runtime.test.ts src/backends
src/drivers/dot/runnerd-dot-driver.test.ts
src/drivers/muse/runnerd-muse-driver.test.ts
src/drivers/codex/codex-protocol-integrity.test.ts --maxWorkers=3` (81
files): 1566 passed, 32 failed, 6 skipped. The failures:
- 30 failures in `runnerd-acpx-permission-ordering.test.ts` and
`runnerd-acpx-permission-forwarding.test.ts`. Both replace the control
plane with a fixture that appended events in place and relied on the 5
ms poll to notice them. The fixture now implements
`onReadableStateChange` and notifies its readers when it emits. Both
files pass (30 of 30).
- 1 failure in `runnerd-codex-transport.test.ts`, `stops a lost
runnerd's provider and escaped tool job from its lineage journal
(journal=true)`: `runner did not durably suspend before checkpoint`. It
passed 3 of 3 when run again alone.
- 1 failure in `runnerd-codex-transport-settlement.test.ts`, the
terminal-replay row of `settles only retained control authority without
starting another provider turn`: `native_cleanup_maintenance_unproven`,
with events still in the runner outbox. It failed again in 2 runs of
that test group and in the rebased run above, each time while the host
load average was 11 to 20. At a load average near 8 it passed 3 of 3
alone and 1 of 1 as a group with the fix. The unchanged master source
(`c8ae02e5ce`) gives the same result: it passed 2 of 2 alone and 1 of 1
as a group at a load average near 8, and the same row failed with the
same error (`native_cleanup_maintenance_unproven`, 27 events still in
the runner outbox) in a group run at a load average of 11 to 15. So this
row is sensitive to host load with or without this change. The failing
step is the retained-session maintenance path. That path builds its own
control plane, has no transport pump, has no listener on the new
notification, and has a fixed 30 second deadline.
- `pnpm verify` returns exit 2 (broader verification required, because
of the new fixture file). CI supplies the broad coverage.
- Not run locally: the server test suites, the repository-wide
typecheck, and the build. CI ran them on `4bce83f50a`: 59 checks passed
and 4 were skipped (Storybook deploy, Storybook visual regression,
Sandbox provider tests, Select Vitest files).

## Risks

- **A change that does not notify.** With no periodic pass, an event is
delivered only when something wakes the pump. Every wake comes from one
of a small, closed set: the five places where the store replaces or
saves its state, the checkpoint publication, the recovered-cursor
update, and the transport's own identity and start points. A new code
path that changes readable state without one of these would leave an
event undelivered until the next change. The regression test runs a full
turn with every interval timer frozen, in both persistence modes, so a
missing wake on the normal path fails the test. The existing transport
suites (attachment, recovery, warm transition, suspension, release and
resume) now run with no timer that could hide a missing wake.
- **Delivery in the next task, not later.** An event now reaches the
driver up to 5 ms earlier. The pass still runs in its own task after the
commit, and the same gates hold a terminal event until the turn start
response is released. The order of events does not change.
- **No protocol, schema, Rust runner, or provider pack change.** The
contract fingerprint inputs are untouched. Saved state from an older
release resumes the same way.

> 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 5.2 (`claude-fable-5-2`), Anthropic, in Claude Code. Tool
use and local code execution.

## 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
- [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
requesting merge

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

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.2 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-11-11 11:08:50 -06:00
…
…
…

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
2.5 GiB
0 Stars 1 Watchers 0 Forks
Languages
TypeScript 92.5%
JavaScript 3.8%
Rust 2.7%
Python 0.3%
CSS 0.3%
Other 0.3%