Dotta eb7c7b083a Recover Muse verification after contact, restart and access restoration (#19909)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip manages AI agents and their work under company access
rules.
> - Muse readiness uses a saved connection, receiver contact and an
authenticated challenge reply.
> - A failed challenge write could leave a saved contact with no later
recovery trigger.
> - A server restart or restored access must recover that contact under
current authority.
> - This pull request uses the existing delivery coordinator and saved
Muse state for recovery.
> - It keeps the normal receiver schedule, authorization checks and real
deadlines.
> - It lets eligible verification recover and lets idle verification
stop work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The first Muse receiver contact could persist while readiness challenge
creation failed. The contact then had no durable retry or startup
recovery path. Later membership, lifecycle or feature restoration could
also leave pending verification without a notice.

**Expected behavior**

Retry a temporary failure through the existing worker. Recover pending
contact after restart. Recheck the current company, agent, operator,
credential and binding generation before issuing a challenge. Stop
verification work while it is ineligible or complete. Do not revive
revoked credentials.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Use the normal invitation and OAuth registration, PKCE and token
flow.
2. Send one receiver contact and let its normal persistence schedule
run.
3. Fail the first readiness challenge operation before it commits.
4. Observe whether the existing worker retries without another contact
or a manual Verify action.
5. Restart the App with a new database owner. Check that it creates one
usable challenge from the saved contact.

**Paperclip version or commit**

The causal baseline test used the unchanged production implementation at
`90148317b2a447794ff29a4acae5648ad11a9770` plus its normal fixture. The
accepted positive test used `9d383041028776ad8469ac4af3fe14ba6c369425`.
The initial published head was
`fe518c9b72504daf6374225987f24d45bc7bcf75`. The lease/auth correction
was locally qualified at `cfd515a207416097fe8b586277d70c4fd4a679fa`. The
current candidate is `6efe722e7eb1e22acd466125c7b4a627611d0273`; its
added Cloud actor fixture correction passed the full normal owning
program and all 35 tests. Its current normal build, lifecycle owner
controls, healthy-wait and restoration measurements are described below.
Earlier results below are bound to their stated revisions.

Related public changes: Refs #19819 for original-principal
authentication. Refs #19750 for the transaction-owned external feature
read. These are related foundations, not duplicate fixes. The current
Muse title and head-branch searches found no duplicate
contact-verification recovery PR. Related maintenance work is #17000 and
terminal assignment settlement is #17793.

## What Changed

- Add a typed, exact-binding verification notice through the existing
Muse delivery queue.
- Register the first-contact notice before its durable write in the same
transaction.
- Recover pending contact from saved state at startup. Retry temporary
failures through the existing scheduler.
- Recheck current feature, lifecycle, credential and access state after
commit. Park unavailable authority without recurring verification scans.
- Add narrowly scoped notices to the existing access, lifecycle,
configuration, company, budget and settings write owners.
- Save a healthy lifecycle verification wait in the existing operation
JSONB. Keep generic unresolved-work and error retries unchanged.
- Commit authenticated confirmation and its lifecycle recheck in one
transaction. Retain a raced recheck under the active lease, and recover
saved waits once at startup.
- Retain a committed lifecycle recheck while an expired attempt still
owns the row, so its late wait cannot park accepted confirmation.
Replacement claims keep their existing owner fence and fresh fact read.
- Keep the receiver gap, persistence and per-segment contact limits
unchanged.
- Add real App OAuth, failure, retry, restart, challenge and quiet
evidence. Add two normal-route restoration tests.
- Document recovery, reconnect requirements and the existing
connected-receiver sleep restriction.

## Verification

- Causal baseline: the real invitation and OAuth flow saved one contact.
The first challenge operation failed. The normal test failed because it
observed one verification attempt instead of a retry. No setup or
cleanup failure was counted as this regression.
- At `9d383041`: normal own Shared/SDK, DB with migration 0441 assets,
Runner TypeScript core and surfaces, module boundaries, and all seven
normal App programs passed. One new redundant role comparison first
failed typecheck; that diagnostic remains recorded and the corrected
full App gate passed.
- At `9d383041`: all 17 maintenance component tests passed with zero
skips. All original deadline, rollback, drain, terminal settlement and
startup controls remain.
- At `9d383041`: the one normal App case passed. Real OAuth authorized
one receiver signal. A retry occurred about 5.01 seconds after the first
failure. A new Db/App owner created one challenge, advanced revision 2
to 3, and accepted authenticated confirmation and mailbox ACK. Query
instrumentation had an active positive control. All measured query,
callback, session and verifier counters stayed equal across the
unchanged scheduled 15-second quiet window. Token revocation and
old-token/signal rejection passed.
- Known App, worker, HTTP and database owners closed without cleanup
errors. The tests used bounded local PostgreSQL and HTTP fixtures. They
did not call a live Muse model.
- Current integrated semantics: the full normal App driver completed all
programs. Only a new test callback had two undefined-value diagnostics.
An explicit defined-value guard corrected that test. The full 416-root
owning program then passed with empty diagnostics. A separate collector
incorrectly required an explicit child `noEmit` field; the normal
inherited setting was verified without repeating the compiler. The
original failures remain recorded.
- The first restoration run failed both cases. Permission parking
recorded 120 main-pool queries without more verifier calls. The
lifecycle counter recorded two denials without their exact scope. These
observations remain unexplained at the individual-query/call level.
Source separately shows a lifecycle readiness retry every two seconds
while the real external reply is absent.
- At `fe518c9b`: normal Shared/SDK and DB producers, module policy, all
seven full App programs, and all 33 pure diagnostic controls passed. The
lifecycle owner file passed all 19 cases, including both
confirmation/park orders, rollback, duplicate notices, startup recovery
and authority controls.
- At `fe518c9b`: the normal OAuth failure/retry/new-Db reconstruction
case passed. Its new healthy-wait window measured 15,002 ms with
unchanged total activity before genuine confirmation; the existing ready
quiet and revocation checks also passed.
- At `fe518c9b`: both normal restoration tests passed in Vitest.
Ordinary viewer-to-operator restoration and Pause/Resume recovered the
same binding, grant and single contact; each committed one challenge and
advanced revision 2 to 3. All six parked, restored and revoked/disabled
quiet windows measured at least 15 seconds with active positive read
controls and unchanged total queries, callbacks, sessions and verifier
calls. Both cleanups passed.
- The restoration wrapper still recorded failure: it required lifetime
lifecycle denial count zero, whereas the measured count was one before
the parked quiet window. The reviewed fixture explicitly permits a
current-authority denial from an earlier observation and requires no
committed challenge before restoration. Precise denial timing relative
to Pause was not serialized. The original wrapper failure is retained;
no rerun or retrospective explanation of the earlier failures is
claimed.
- Review exposed an expired-lease race. The added real-store baseline
test failed after the late defer restored `waitingForSignal`; no setup
or timeout was counted as the regression. On `cfd515a`, the whole
lifecycle owner file passed all 20 tests, including that case. The full
normal production declaration program (1067 roots), verification program
(662), and auth owning program (405) passed; all 1942 declarations
remained byte-identical.
- The original remote auth-session shard failed three tests because
their partial query adapters lacked the new binding query's
join/order/limit chain. A fixture-only correction preserved the real
notifier and existing authorization assertions. All 12 auth-session
tests passed locally.
- Complete remote inspection also found 33 failures in the 35-test Cloud
actor fixture with the same missing `innerJoin` method and downstream
incomplete-auth assertions. Its original full log and exact synthetic
Source comparison are retained. At `6efe722e`, the three-line fixture
adapter repair passed the complete normal 662-root test program and the
whole 35-test file with zero failures or skips. All existing lock,
authorization, settings, debounce and unfinished-auth assertions remain.
- The earlier healthy/restoration quiet measurements remain bound to
`fe518c9b`. Those steady 15-second windows did not exercise a
still-owned attempt passing its 120-second lease. The targeted
expired-owner regression qualifies that new boundary; it is not a fresh
measurement of the earlier windows.
- The initial `fe518c9b` remote gates failed the auth fixtures and
reported a Greptile 4/5 P1. The aggregate failure reported the
underlying shard. Those actual causes were fixed and qualified above.
- Current `6efe722e` remote gates completed with **57 successful checks
and three explicit skips**. The full latest edited Greptile summary is
**5/5**, explicitly reviews this exact head, and has no new finding. The
original P1 thread is resolved. All general, inline and nested review
pages were read.
- One current-head CI attempt timed out after 30 seconds in the Runner
evidence/privacy file, with 6,864 passes and one failure. That file and
its transitive inputs are byte-identical to the CI base. A separate
local diagnostic preserved every assertion and the original timeout, ran
the full normal Runner test project and the entire 41-case file, and
passed all 41 with zero skips. Its private bounded timing records
measured the target body at 74 ms. The diagnostic was then removed,
restoring the exact original test. This is local recovery evidence; the
original CI stalled await was not recorded and its cause remains
**unproven**.
- One retry of only the failed jobs on the unchanged head passed the
Runner support suite and dependent aggregate verification. The complete
second attempt and original failure logs are preserved. No test,
timeout, privacy guard or product code was weakened. This result does
not turn the original timeout into an explained failure or a diagnosed
flake.
- Full recursive typecheck, full `test:run` and a full release build
were not repeated locally. The normal full App programs, focused
producers and tests above passed, and the required current-head remote
gates passed. Final review is against the exact unchanged head; local
quiet remains separate from deployed suspension.

Reviewer commands use the normal project entry points: `node
server/scripts/typecheck-layers.mjs`, the whole
`server/src/services/muse-maintenance.test.ts` file, and both normal App
PostgreSQL files. PostgreSQL fixtures require explicit owned
fixture/admin URLs and normal migrations before imports. Run the files
serially with one worker. The private controller retains exact Source,
output, worker and owner-closure receipts.

## Risks

- Missing or early producer notices could lose a restoration trigger.
Notices stay in the transaction that commits the write. The worker
checks current authority after commit.
- A stale notice must not grant access. Binding generation, current
membership, company, agent and credential checks remain authoritative.
Revoked credentials require reconnecting.
- The change adds no table, migration, alternate task queue or periodic
verification scan. It adds two optional fields to existing lifecycle
operation JSONB. Generic pending/error deadlines, setup holds and manual
repair remain obligations.
- Confirmation can race with an active verification attempt. The park
compare-and-set must retain the durable recheck. Startup recovery uses a
fixed cutoff and keyset pages; it must not become another recurring
scan. Wrong company, stale version, pause and revoked credentials must
stay fenced.
- The connected receiver still has its documented tenant-sleep
restriction. Worker quiet is not proof of deployed suspension or
external wake.
- The normal challenge reply is sent by an authenticated protocol
fixture. Live Muse background replies, cost/usage, full Muse lifecycle
and full hosted Dot behavior remain unqualified. Partial Dot profile ACK
and unsigned-device cutover stay withheld.
- Restoration coverage for the additional company, budget, configuration
and feature producers remains a separate qualification obligation. This
pull request does not mark the whole hosted area complete.

## Model Used

OpenAI `gpt-6.1-sol` authored the implementation and tests with local
code and tool use. A GPT-6-based Codex coordinator reviewed the changes
and owns integration. Its exact underlying model ID is not exposed.
Context window sizes are unavailable. No context size is inferred.

## 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
2026-11-07 16:41:15 -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
1.8 GiB
0 Stars 1 Watchers 0 Forks
Languages
TypeScript 92%
JavaScript 4%
Rust 2.9%
Python 0.3%
CSS 0.3%
Other 0.3%