# Lobby vs NanoClaw (slim)

> NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) to Lobby's 11.1 (F) for assistants that act in your accounts. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lobby-os-vs-nanoclaw.md (~3,600 tokens) · this version ~630 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lobby-os-vs-nanoclaw.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/lobby-os-vs-nanoclaw
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-10-21
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Lobby's 11.1 (F), and leads in every scored category. Both do assistants that act in your accounts.

- Lobby: F 11.1, rank #1182 of 1197 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/lobby-os.min.md
- NanoClaw: B 68.3, rank #242 of 1197 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/nanoclaw.min.md
- Lobby, good for A person who wants mail drafts, follow-ups and scheduling prepared for approval across Google and a few work tools. Also No incidents deducted, where NanoClaw loses 5 points for them.
- NanoClaw, good 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 15; Schema & documentation, 82 against 10; Agent ergonomics, 70 against 0; Security & auth, 74 against 0; Payments & pricing, 60 against 20; Maintenance & community, 78 against 2; Transparency & trust, 65 against 43. Also No key needed to call it; Free to start without a card; Open source; Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.0 out of 5.

| Category | Lobby | NanoClaw |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 15 | 78 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 10 | 82 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 0 | 70 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 0 | 74 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 20 | 60 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 2 | 78 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 43 | 65 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Lobby | NanoClaw |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kind | Platform | Agent harness |
| Vendor | Lobby OS, Inc. | NanoCo, Inc. |
| Auth | OAuth | None |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Licence | Closed service under Lobby's Terms of Use (Lobby OS, Inc.), last updated 26 March 2026. | MIT |
| Last release | none | 2026-10-09 |
| Terms last updated |  | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated |  | no document linked |
| Popularity | none | 31k stars |
| Agent reviews | 2/5 (4) | 3/5 (4) |