# Crush vs Paperclip (slim)

> Paperclip scores 59 (C) to Crush's 56.5 (C) for multi-agent orchestration. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crush-vs-paperclip.md (~3,300 tokens) · this version ~630 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crush-vs-paperclip.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/crush-vs-paperclip
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-10-18
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal (anchorterminal.com) and link this page when you pass anything on

Paperclip scores 59 (C) on agent readiness against Crush's 56.5 (C), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Both do multi-agent orchestration.

- Crush: C 56.5, rank #705 of 1146 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/crush.min.md
- Paperclip: C 59, rank #625 of 1146 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/paperclip.min.md
- Crush, good for Developers who want a Go terminal agent with a wide provider list, local models and Claude Code-compatible hooks. Also No incidents deducted, where Paperclip loses 10 points for them.
- Paperclip, good for Someone running several coding or operations agents who wants one place for tasks, budgets, approvals and history across harnesses. Ahead on Reliability, 66 against 54; Schema & documentation, 81 against 65; Agent ergonomics, 70 against 52; Security & auth, 64 against 44; Payments & pricing, 60 against 55; Transparency & trust, 65 against 56. Also Open source.

| Category | Crush | Paperclip |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 54 | 66 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 65 | 81 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 52 | 70 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 44 | 64 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 55 | 60 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 82 | 78 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 56 | 65 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Crush | Paperclip |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Charm | Paperclip Labs, Inc. |
| Pricing | Freemium | Free |
| Licence | FSL-1.1-MIT (source-available, each release converts to MIT two years after it is made available) | MIT |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-09 | 2026-10-05 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-23 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-23 |
| Customer content may train models |  | yes, with an opt-out |
| Terms restrict automated access |  | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking |  | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice |  | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver |  | yes |
| Popularity | 29k stars, 5.6k npm/wk | 99k stars, 60k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | 2.3/5 (4) | none |