Get an audit

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

Asmi vs NanoClaw

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Asmi's 33.3 (F), and leads in every scored category. 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 NanoClawNanoCo, Inc. · Agent harness B68.3/100#229 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 NanoClaw loses 5 points for them

Watch for

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

NanoClaw B

Best for A technical owner who wants an assistant on their own machine, reachable from chat apps, with container isolation and scheduled tasks, and who is willing to keep a fork.

Ahead on

  • Reliability, 78 against 30
  • Schema & documentation, 82 against 20
  • Agent ergonomics, 70 against 43
  • Security & auth, 74 against 49
  • Payments & pricing, 60 against 30
  • Maintenance & community, 78 against 3
  • Transparency & trust, 65 against 51

Also in its favour

  • No key needed to call it
  • Free to start without a card
  • Open source

Watch for

The Claude provider runs with permissionMode: 'bypassPermissions', so shell, file and web tools run inside the container with no prompt

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runAsmiNanoClawEdge
Reliability16%203078NanoClaw +48
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.22082NanoClaw +62
Agent ergonomics13%16.24370NanoClaw +27
Security & auth14%17.54974NanoClaw +25
Payments & pricing10%12.53060NanoClaw +30
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.8378NanoClaw +75
Transparency & trust7%8.85165NanoClaw +14
Negative events≤150-5
TotalF 33.3/100B 68.3/100

Facts side by side

FactAsmiNanoClaw
KindPlatformAgent harness
VendorHumint Labs, Inc.NanoCo, Inc.
Hosted endpointhttps://prod.asmiai.com/mcp/claude/no (local only)
TransportsStreamable HTTP
AuthOAuthNone
PricingFreemiumFree
x402nono
LicenceClosed service under Asmi's Terms of Service (Humint Labs, Inc., a Delaware corporation, effective October 2026).MIT
Tools exposed12none
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last releasenone2026-10-09
Terms last updatedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno 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
Popularitynone31k 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.

NanoClaw

Each session runs in an unprivileged Docker container and API keys stay in a credential gateway on the host, so a manipulated agent cannot read them. Inside the container the agent runs with permission prompts off, network egress is open by default, and it can message any chat it is wired to without approval.

Before you call either

Asmi

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

NanoClaw

  1. Install with git clone and bash nanoclaw.sh. There is no registry package, and setup needs Docker, Node 22 or later and a Claude or Codex credential
  2. Set NANOCLAW_EGRESS_LOCKDOWN=true before giving an agent credentials or an audience of strangers. The default leaves egress open
  3. Put chats with different audiences in separate agent groups. Every session of a group shares one read-write workspace and memory tree
  4. Turn on per-request approval for a secret in the gateway when its use should wait for a person. It is off unless configured
  5. On OneCLI installs, move the gateway to 1.42.0 by the upgrade guide before updating to 2026.10.0. The updater stops until that is done

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Asmi or NanoClaw?

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Asmi's 33.3 (F), and leads in every scored category.

Are Asmi and NanoClaw open source?

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

Other comparisons with Asmi or NanoClaw

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

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.

Get an auditSee a sample report