DottaandPaperclip 8771606fd8 test(e2e): cover browser task editing and reopening (#18782)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage tasks and agent work.
> - Daily QA uses reusable Product E2E journeys against a named target.
> - Existing task journeys cover creation and assignment.
> - They lack saved title and label edits across completion and
reopening.
> - This pull request adds one browser-only lifecycle journey with
independent saved-state checks.
> - It also puts shared registry entries on separate lines so
independent case PRs can use distinct insertion points.
> - The registry formatting preserves every token, value, entry order
and case body.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs: #18655.

**What existing behavior does this improve?**

Product E2E coverage of ordinary task editing and completion.

**Current behavior**

The reusable catalog covers task creation and assignment. It lacks one
journey that edits a task, reloads it, completes it and reopens it while
retaining its saved context. Several shared registries put all entries
on one line, so independent case additions conflict.

**Proposed behavior**

Create a task assigned to the signed-in person. Edit its title and
create one label through the visible UI. Change its status to In
Progress, reload it, mark it Done, reload it, reopen it to Todo and
reload it again. Require the exact saved task and label throughout.
Preserve its description, assignee, project and priority. Allow no agent
run or model usage. Put the existing shared registry entries on separate
lines without changing their contents or order.

## What Changed

- Add `task-edit-lifecycle` and six required checks for browser
creation, saved edits, reload, completion and reopening, preserved
context and no agent work.
- Add valid, wrong and missing evidence controls. Retain allowlisted
observations and bounded GET failure receipts in private evidence.
- Register the case, feature associations, catalog expectation,
source-hash inputs and browser-only result validation.
- Extend target ownership for run-owned labels and one exact predeclared
title change. Require compatible scoped cleanup before selecting the
case.
- Open the real side panel or Properties control when needed. Exclude
inert and aria-hidden Labels rows and require visible readback. Document
inline title editing and the case prerequisites.
- Keep priority editing disabled. Verify that the saved priority remains
unchanged.
- Keep Cursor test observations outside its existing Stop deadline,
preserve the full rejection/Stop overlap matrix and add pre-release
no-provider-call controls. Production behavior and deadline values stay
unchanged.
- Format five shared registry files with one entry per line: the
JourneyId and AgentJourney unions, definition filenames, expected
catalog IDs and agent run counts. No registry entry moves in this PR.

## Verification

- Current head is `d1af3aae3712455c90db937fa7a5141555710506`. Its only
change from integrated head d40f28 is the Cursor driver test-fixture
ordering repair described below. The prior normal merge consumes actual
master `d59791828482f213713ca55000c40e6c9c6c03e5`, including reviewed UI
repair #18848 and the existing idle-history fixture repair from #18853.
It has both real parents, no conflicts and the required trailer. All
seven lifecycle case/oracle/catalog/documentation blobs and six selected
registry constructs remain exact 10625b. The idle-history fixture is
byte-identical to master. The PR diff has 13 paths, including the one
Cursor test file, and no feature-map or production-driver changes.
- 167 focused tests pass across catalog, target contracts, agent
evidence, lifecycle evidence and observation reads. E2E TypeScript and
credential-free discovery of21 Product E2E cases pass. The real merged
idle-history and exposure-reservation suites pass all 109 tests in132
seconds, including the owned HTTP-process adoption assertion and
explicit unknown-listener denial/drift controls. Canonical shared/SDK,
database and Runner TypeScript dependencies were rebuilt for the changed
master inputs. All4,220 tracked package/script/root inputs and 4,954
dependency outputs are recorded; the outputs remain unchanged after the
tests and browser journey. The first database build stopped because
child PATH selected a different global pnpm and its version switch could
not fetch signed metadata. The preserved attempt made no package or
source change. Using the already-installed verified pnpm9 on child PATH
passed. No install, Rust or provider-build global setup ran.
- One fresh canonical managed-local browser journey passes on exact
d40f28: all six checks and authentication, setup, journey, collection
and cleanup pass. Cleanup releases the disposable instance. The journey
takes 12.059 seconds and has explicit zero-run readback at all five
saved states. Its runtime commit isd40f28. Definition hash is
`f262707de2e544cecdb9c5c4c5222d61f04a122575b438658dec069e1a93f9cb`. The
prior10625b local6-check/5-phase pass remains separately recorded with
its own source and definition hash.
- A real closed-panel control previously reproduced the original
label-interaction failure using only the presentation preference
`paperclip:panel-visible=false`. The corrected journey passed all six
unchanged checks through an ordinary Show properties click. A separate
canonical743 local run passed all six checks and five phases with
released cleanup. No domain outcome was supplied by that control.
- A separate QA staging qualification passed all six checks and five
phases on exact743, with closed cleanup and verified zero agent work.
That original pass remains bound to743. It is not regraded or relabeled
as a staging run of10625b. Daily admission remains a separate
coordinator action.
- Earlier material failures remain part of the verification record. The
first managed-local setup failed before authentication with an embedded
PostgreSQL exit code of null; its original cause remains unresolved. A
later loader diagnostic found missing library aliases in this isolated
checkout. Existing bundled libraries were hash-verified and the aliases
were restored only there. Subsequent real runs exposed an overlong label
name, a status picker name mismatch and the closed-panel issue. Each
failed result and cleanup record is retained. The fixes preserve the
full campaign name, validate the production48-character label limit
before mutations, and use the actual visible controls.
- Original full CI
[41652807327](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41652807327)
failed an unchanged Discord fixture assertion, attention-retention
fixture limits and the CLI import/export startup limit. One bounded
recheck recovered Discord but repeated the other failures. The reviewed
merged retention-fixture repair was consumed normally through #18770.
Full CI
[41667811850](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41667811850)
passed all E2E shards but exposed inbox/account-fixture failures. This
branch consumed the actual reviewed repairs from #18798 and #18799.
Original logs and failed assertions remain retained; no timeout or
oracle was weakened.
- Original743 CI
[41682757346](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41682757346)
failed the unchanged CLI suite's30-second child-server startup hook. A
bounded local phase probe passed the same startup oracle but did not
prove the original CI cause. One coordinator-approved official recheck
followed. Timestamp comparison shows46 non-skipped jobs retained their
original start and end times; only the failed CLI job and final
aggregate have new start and end times. The skipped selection job
remains unclassified. New GitHub job IDs alone did not prove new
executions. The original startup failure remains preserved and its cause
remains unproven.
- Formatting-head CI
[41726104217](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41726104217)
failed the upstream idle-history process-adoption test and dependent
verify job:46 jobs passed, one was skipped and two failed. Its actual
synthetic checkout had parents masterf187 and10625b; the failed test is
absent from 10625b itself. The assertion expected one adopted process
and received zero. A pure production-function control proves a
conditional reserved-port drift path, but the actual failed CI port and
full reconciliation counters were not logged. The actual CI cause
remains unproven. This branch consumes the already-reviewed bounded
fixture-port repair in #18853 through its normal actual-master merge.
The original failure is retained. No unchanged-code retry, timeout
increase, skipped assertion or ownership-policy change was used.
- Integrated-head CI
[41730231620](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41730231620)
passed the formerly failing server1/12 lane, Typecheck, Build and E2E.
It failed the Cursor package fixture below and the dependent verify job.
A separate server4/12 job lost runner communication; the exact runner
instance and Spot-request readback confirm a capacity interruption. Its
unavailable log is not treated as a test pass. The original failures
remain retained. No old-head retry was made.
- The Cursor fixture sets a 300 ms cancellation budget, holds a
rejected-create checkpoint and originally performed directory/file
observations while that clock ran. Controlled400ms observation latency
on the original fixture reproduces the same fenced Stop error. The same
diagnostic passes after moving file observations before the cancellation
clock, or while the initial Stop-checkpoint gate still prevents it from
starting. The driver,300ms configuration and timeout negatives are
unchanged. Every original assertion AST remains, and three new
assertions forbid provider observation/cancel calls before releasing the
checkpoint. All81 driver tests,12 client tests and43 checkpoint-archive
tests pass; Runner TypeScript build and E2E TypeScript pass. The actual
CI inner error and observation duration were not logged, so its precise
original cause remains unproven.
- Final d1af3a full CI
[41733938939](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41733938939)
attempt3 is successful. Attempt1 lost four exact-bound Spot runners;
attempt2 recovered the Runner and both server lanes but lost the
replacement E2E runner to another confirmed Spot capacity interruption.
Two separate coordinator-authorized official failed-job rechecks were
recorded. Attempt3 passed the E2E path and final aggregate. Successful
executions retain their original timestamps; new job IDs alone were not
used as proof of re-execution. All original failures remain retained.
- Fresh Greptile check126258142754 completed successfully on exact
d1af3a with 5/5 and zero unresolved threads. Full recursive workspace
typecheck, all workspace tests and the full build were not repeated
locally; the corresponding hosted full CI gates pass.

## Risks

The case requires target support for `label` ownership and scoped
`taskEdit.revisedTitle` cleanup. Older target adapters must not select
it. Cleanup must reconcile lost creation responses and exact predeclared
title saves without touching other resources.

Registry formatting changes the harness definition hash because that
hash includes source bytes. Historical runs must keep their original
source and hash. The formatting does not change runtime values, order,
dispatch, case checks or product behavior. Later case PRs must verify
their actual merge resolutions and final-head checks before admission.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex with reasoning, tool use and code execution.
The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window
size.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-11-03 17:47:13 -06:00
2026-03-07 02:57:28 +09:00

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

Quickstart · Docs · GitHub · Discord · Twitter · Website

MIT License Stars Discord Security posture verified by Superagent

Star History Rank


Sign up for the Paperclip Cloud waitlist →


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

Open-source orchestration for teams of AI agents.

If OpenClaw is an employee, Paperclip is the company.

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

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

Manage business goals, not pull requests.

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

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

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

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


Paperclip is right for you if

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

The four pillars

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

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

Features

🔌 Bring Your Own Agent

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

🎯 Goal Alignment

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

💓 Heartbeats

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

💰 Cost Control

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

🏢 Multi-Organization

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

🎫 Task Threads

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

🛡️ Governance

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

📊 Org Chart

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

📱 Mobile Ready

Monitor and manage your autonomous businesses from anywhere.

🔗 Apps & Connections

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

👥 Shared Agents, Personal Accounts

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

🧠 Skills & Skill Studio

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

📅 Scheduled Routines

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

📎 Artifacts & Feedback

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

📦 Ready-Made Teams

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

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


Problems Paperclip solves

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

Why Paperclip is special

Paperclip handles the hard orchestration details correctly.

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

What's Under the Hood

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

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

The Systems

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


What Paperclip is not

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

Quickstart

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

Just ask your agent to install Paperclip

Share the installation guide with your agent.

Or install it yourself

With Node.js 24.11 or newer installed:

npx paperclipai@latest onboard --yes

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

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

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

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

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

Troubleshooting: private npm registry .npmrc

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

Diagnostic:

npm config get registry

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

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

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

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

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

Or manually:

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

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

Requirements: Node.js 24.11+, pnpm 9.15+

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

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


FAQ

Q: Is this project maintained or just slop?

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


Q: What does a typical setup look like?

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

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


Q: Can I run multiple companies?

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


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

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


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

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

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


Q: Do agents run continuously?

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


Development

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

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

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


Roadmap

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

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


Community & Plugins

Find Plugins and more at awesome-paperclip

Observability

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

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

Telemetry

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

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

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

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

Contributing

We welcome contributions. See the contributing guide for details.

We're hiring


Community


License

MIT © 2026 Paperclip Labs, Inc

Star History

Star History Chart

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

S
Description
No description provided
Readme MIT
2.6 GiB
0 Stars 1 Watchers 0 Forks
Languages
TypeScript 92.1%
JavaScript 4.1%
Rust 2.6%
Python 0.4%
CSS 0.3%
Other 0.3%