Get an audit

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

NanoClaw vs Orbits

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Orbits's 15.6 (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

NanoClawNanoCo, Inc. · Agent harness B68.3/100#229 of 1010 OrbitsNemus AI, Inc. · Platform F15.6/100#997 of 1010

Which one, for what

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 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 54
  • Transparency & trust, 65 against 43

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

Orbits F

Best for Families who want one shared assistant for calendars, lists, meals, chores and household email.

Also in its favour

  • No incidents deducted, where NanoClaw loses 5 points for them

Watch for

No public agent API, as llms.txt states.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runNanoClawOrbitsEdge
Reliability16%207815NanoClaw +63
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.28210NanoClaw +72
Agent ergonomics13%16.2700NanoClaw +70
Security & auth14%17.5740NanoClaw +74
Payments & pricing10%12.56020NanoClaw +40
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.87854NanoClaw +24
Transparency & trust7%8.86543NanoClaw +22
Negative events≤15-50
TotalB 68.3/100F 15.6/100

Facts side by side

FactNanoClawOrbits
KindAgent harnessPlatform
VendorNanoCo, Inc.Nemus AI, Inc.
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneOAuth or key
PricingFreePaid
x402nono
LicenceMITClosed service under the Orbits Terms of Service (Nemus AI, Inc.).
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtyesyes
Last release2026-10-092026-10-13
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
Popularity31k starsnone

Verdicts

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.

Orbits

Orbits is a family household app whose assistant, Bit, runs shared calendars, lists and meals, reads household email and places restaurant calls after approval, with iOS releases every week or two. No outside agent can call it, prices appear only as App Store in-app purchases, and no status page, security contact or named subprocessors were found.

Before you call either

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

Orbits

  1. Don't plan to call Orbits from another agent. llms.txt says no public agent API is offered.
  2. Tell the owner the assistant needs an Orbits subscription bought in the app, and that any trial appears only at purchase.

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, NanoClaw or Orbits?

NanoClaw scores 68.3 (B) on agent readiness against Orbits's 15.6 (F), and leads in every scored category.

Are NanoClaw and Orbits open source?

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

Other comparisons with NanoClaw or Orbits

Disclosure

Orbits 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