Get an audit

Head to head · Assistant proactive · October 2026 research run

Lindy vs NanoClaw

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Lindy's 32.3 (F), and leads in every scored category. Both do assistant proactive.

Best AI personal assistants that act for one person · All 190 assistants comparisons

LindyCrivello Corp (doing business as Lindy) · Platform F32.3/100#968 of 986 NanoClawNanoCo, Inc. · Agent harness B68.3/100#229 of 986

Which one, for what

Lindy F

Best for Lindy suits a person or small team that lives in Slack and Google or Microsoft mail and wants briefs, drafts, scheduling and meeting notes done on a schedule.

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

The integrations page says approval settings apply in shared Slack threads only. Web chat, Slack direct messages, iMessage and SMS are not covered, and reads are never covered.

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 24
  • Schema & documentation, 82 against 32
  • Agent ergonomics, 70 against 43
  • Security & auth, 74 against 49
  • Payments & pricing, 60 against 35
  • Maintenance & community, 78 against 9
  • Transparency & trust, 65 against 52

Also in its favour

  • No key needed to call it
  • 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 runLindyNanoClawEdge
Reliability16%202478NanoClaw +54
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.23282NanoClaw +50
Agent ergonomics13%16.24370NanoClaw +27
Security & auth14%17.54974NanoClaw +25
Payments & pricing10%12.53560NanoClaw +25
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.8978NanoClaw +69
Transparency & trust7%8.85265NanoClaw +13
Negative events≤15-3-5
TotalF 32.3/100B 68.3/100

Facts side by side

FactLindyNanoClaw
KindPlatformAgent harness
VendorCrivello Corp (doing business as Lindy)NanoCo, Inc.
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthOAuthNone
PricingPaidFree
x402nono
LicenceProprietary service under Lindy's Terms of Service. No source is publishedMIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesyes
Last release2025-10-212026-10-09
Terms last updated2026-09-24no document linked
Privacy policy last updated2026-09-28no document linked
Customer content may train modelsnot found in the text
Terms restrict automated accessyes
Terms restrict benchmarkingyes
Terms or service can change without noticeyes
Arbitration or class-action waiveryes
Popularitynone31k stars

Verdicts

Lindy

Lindy keeps what it remembers in files the owner can read and edit, and publishes credit prices. Its approval setting applies in shared Slack threads only, so writes asked for by direct message, text or web chat run unasked, which its pricing page does not say. It has no status page, and its changelog stops in October 2025.

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

Lindy

  1. Treat a request sent by direct message, text or web chat as unguarded. Approval prompts appear in shared Slack threads only.
  2. Run a routine as a dry run before turning it on. A dry run reads real data and sends, posts and writes nothing.
  3. Turn off unused tools after adding an MCP server. Every supported tool arrives switched on, and a large server adds more than a hundred.
  4. Expect a billed seat for anyone who mentions Lindy in Slack. A teammate who joins that way has seven free days first.
  5. Connect only hosted MCP servers on public HTTPS with streamable HTTP, the one kind the docs describe.

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, Lindy or NanoClaw?

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Lindy's 32.3 (F), and leads in every scored category.

Are Lindy and NanoClaw open source?

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

Other comparisons with Lindy or NanoClaw

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