Head to head · Assistants reached by message · October 2026 research run

Asmi vs nanobot

nanobot scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against Asmi's 33.3 (F), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Both do assistants reached by message.

Best AI personal assistants that act for one person · All 834 assistants comparisons

AsmiHumint Labs, Inc. · Platform F33.3/100#973 of 1010 nanobotHKUDS · Agent harness B62.4/100#446 of 1010

Which one, for what

Asmi F

Best for An agent that needs phone calls, texts and emails to businesses done for its owner.

Also in its favour

A hosted endpoint, with nothing to install
No incidents deducted, where nanobot loses 6 points for them

Watch for

Tool JSON Schemas and annotations can't be read before OAuth (unauthenticated initialize returns 401).

nanobot B

Best for A technical owner who wants an assistant on their own machine across many chat apps, with file-based memory and a free choice of model.

Ahead on

Reliability, 70 against 30
Schema & documentation, 77 against 20
Agent ergonomics, 74 against 43
Security & auth, 63 against 49
Payments & pricing, 60 against 30
Maintenance & community, 82 against 3

Also in its favour

No key needed to call it
Open source

Watch for

No per-action approval was found in the docs or source. The agent sends messages, runs shell commands and edits files without asking

Score by category

Category	Weight this run	Asmi	nanobot	Edge
Reliability	16%20	30	70	nanobot +40
Performance	10%pending	pending	pending	not scored in this run
Schema & documentation	13%16.2	20	77	nanobot +57
Agent ergonomics	13%16.2	43	74	nanobot +31
Security & auth	14%17.5	49	63	nanobot +14
Payments & pricing	10%12.5	30	60	nanobot +30
Task success	10%pending	pending	pending	not scored in this run
Maintenance & community	7%8.8	3	82	nanobot +79
Transparency & trust	7%8.8	51	48	Asmi +3
Negative events	≤15	0	-6
Total		F 33.3/100	B 62.4/100

Facts side by side

Fact	Asmi	nanobot
Kind	Platform	Agent harness
Vendor	Humint Labs, Inc.	HKUDS
Hosted endpoint	`https://prod.asmiai.com/mcp/claude/`	no (local only)
Transports	Streamable HTTP
Auth	OAuth	None
Pricing	Freemium	Free
x402	no	no
Licence	Closed service under Asmi's Terms of Service (Humint Labs, Inc., a Delaware corporation, effective October 2026).	MIT
Tools exposed	12	none
Read-only variant documented	no	no
llms.txt	no	yes
Last release	none	2026-09-15
Terms last updated		no document linked
Privacy policy last updated		no document linked
Customer content may train models
Terms restrict automated access
Terms restrict benchmarking
Terms or service can change without notice
Arbitration or class-action waiver
Popularity	none	49k stars

Verdicts

Asmi

Asmi is a hosted errand service with a 12-tool MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Muse, using OAuth with separate scopes for tracking tasks and for contacting people. Tool schemas sit behind sign-in, the outreach scope is ticked by default, and no status page, changelog or security contact was found.

nanobot

nanobot runs on the owner's machine under the MIT licence, with no telemetry found in its source and memory kept as files the owner can read and restore. No per-action approval step was found, and the shell sandbox and workspace restriction are off by default. Five security advisories were published between March and September 2026, all with fixes.

Before you call either

Asmi

Use the endpoint for your own client (/mcp/claude/, /mcp/openai/ or /mcp/meta/). A token from another client gets 403.
Call discover_search before execute_start, then poll execute_status with the task id instead of starting the task again.
Answer Asmi's questions with execute_advance. Calls already placed can't be recalled by execute_cancel.
Expect outreach_not_permitted if the owner unticked contact people. Ask them to reconnect rather than retrying.
Check billing_status before starting a task, since each outreach task uses one of the month's quota.

nanobot

Set tools.restrictToWorkspace to true and tools.exec.sandbox to bwrap or seatbelt before giving it real accounts. Both are off by default
Run 0.3.0 or later. Earlier versions carry the published SSRF flaw in web fetch (GHSA-vc5v-6vwm-wf9m)
Keep allowFrom narrow on every channel and never set ["*"] on Email, which has no pairing
Write secrets as ${VAR} references in ~/.nanobot/config.json. Plain values are stored in clear text
Use nanobot -m "..." for a one-shot run, and keep nanobot gateway running for channels, schedules and heartbeat

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Asmi or nanobot?

nanobot scores 62.4 (B) on agent readiness against Asmi's 33.3 (F), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories.

Are Asmi and nanobot open source?

No open-source release is listed for Asmi. nanobot is open source (MIT).

Other comparisons with Asmi or nanobot

Disclosure

Asmi competes with LocalGhost, which Anchor Terminal's founder builds. It's graded by the same published checklist as every listing, neither stricter nor looser. Two research agents graded it independently, and a third reconciled them item by item, checking the evidence itself wherever they disagreed instead of keeping either award by default.

Machine-readable

This page as Markdown /compare/asmi-vs-nanobot.md · slim .min.md · JSON .json (or send Accept: text/markdown)
Each listing in full /api/v1/tools/asmi.json · /api/v1/tools/nanobot.json
From a terminal anchor compare asmi nanobot (the CLI)
Over MCP compare_tools {"a": "asmi", "b": "nanobot"} at /mcp, no key

Which one, for what

Score by category

Facts side by side

Verdicts

Asmi

nanobot

Before you call either

Asmi

nanobot

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Asmi or nanobot?

Are Asmi and nanobot open source?

Other comparisons with Asmi or nanobot

Disclosure

Machine-readable

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?