Sign in

Head to head · Multi-agent orchestration · October 2026 research run

OpenMausBot vs Paperclip

OpenMausBot scores 65.4 (B) on agent readiness against Paperclip's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 7 scored categories. Paperclip leads on reliability, security & auth, payments & pricing and transparency & trust. Both do multi-agent orchestration.

Best agent harnesses and coding agents · All 875 harnesses comparisons

OpenMausBotSupamaus Software Private Limited · Agent harness B65.4/100#368 of 1238 PaperclipPaperclip Labs, Inc. · Agent harness C59/100#661 of 1238

Which one, for what

OpenMausBot B

Best for A person or an outside agent who wants several CLI agents (Claude Code, Codex, Grok, ACP CLIs) organised as named bots with their own computers, routines and approvals, driven by MCP or a CLI.

Ahead on

  • Schema & documentation, 90 against 81
  • Agent ergonomics, 77 against 70

Also in its favour

  • Runs on your own machine

Watch for

New bots start at Full access, which approves provider permission requests without a card

Paperclip C

Best 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 60
  • Security & auth, 64 against 59
  • Payments & pricing, 60 against 50
  • Transparency & trust, 66 against 59

Watch for

claude_local defaults dangerouslySkipPermissions to true and codex_local defaults to bypassing approvals and the sandbox, with agents running on the host

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runOpenMausBotPaperclipEdge
Reliability16%206066Paperclip +6
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.29081OpenMausBot +9
Agent ergonomics13%16.27770OpenMausBot +7
Security & auth14%17.55964Paperclip +5
Payments & pricing10%12.55060Paperclip +10
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.87478Paperclip +4
Transparency & trust7%8.85966Paperclip +7
Negative events≤15-2-10
TotalB 65.4/100C 59/100

Facts side by side

FactOpenMausBotPaperclip
KindAgent harnessAgent harness
VendorSupamaus Software Private LimitedPaperclip Labs, Inc.
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transportsstdio
AuthOAuth or keyOAuth or key
PricingFreemiumFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0MIT
Tools exposed20none
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-10-302026-10-05
Terms last updated2026-10-102026-07-23
Privacy policy last updated2026-10-182026-07-23
Customer content may train modelsnot found in the textyes, with an opt-out
Terms restrict automated accessnot found in the textnot found in the text
Terms restrict benchmarkingnot found in the textnot found in the text
Terms or service can change without noticenot found in the textnot found in the text
Arbitration or class-action waivernot found in the textyes
Popularity8.2k stars, 3.5k npm/wk99k stars, 60k npm/wk

Verdicts

OpenMausBot

A bounded 20-tool MCP server with typed schemas, annotations and idempotent sends, and a headless CLI with JSON output and exit codes, let another agent hand work to a bot team and wait on it. New bots start at Full access, so provider permission requests pass without a card, and usage analytics stay on until switched off.

Paperclip

Board approvals, budgets with a hard stop and an activity log sit above whichever harnesses do the work, and eleven stable versions shipped in 90 days. The Claude Code and Codex adapters skip permission prompts and the sandbox by default, and twelve security advisories, five of them critical, have been published since April 2026.

Before you call either

OpenMausBot

  1. Ask the owner for a pairing code from Settings > Phone, exchange it at POST /api/auth/pair, and set OPENMAUSBOT_TOKEN with an explicit OMB_PORT
  2. Pass a send_id with every send_bot_message and send_channel_message, so a retry returns the first receipt
  3. Use wait_for_conversation instead of polling, and on needs-user stop and tell the owner a card is waiting
  4. Check a bot's access level with the owner before sending work. New bots run at Full access unless defaults were changed
  5. Ask the owner to switch off Settings > General > Usage analytics if nothing beyond model calls should leave the machine

Paperclip

  1. Set PAPERCLIP_TELEMETRY_DISABLED=1 or DO_NOT_TRACK=1 before the first start. Telemetry is on by default
  2. Set dangerouslySkipPermissions and dangerouslyBypassApprovalsAndSandbox to false on agents that read untrusted input, or run them in a sandbox provider
  3. Install with Node.js 24.11 or newer, and install and sign in to each harness CLI on the host first. Paperclip assumes they are there
  4. Use --bind lan or --bind tailnet at onboarding for anything beyond one machine. The default local_trusted mode treats every request as the board admin
  5. Treat 409 on task checkout as owned by another agent and pick different work. The API docs say not to retry

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, OpenMausBot or Paperclip?

OpenMausBot scores 65.4 (B) on agent readiness against Paperclip's 59 (C), and leads in 2 of 7 scored categories. Paperclip leads on reliability, security & auth, payments & pricing and transparency & trust.

Are OpenMausBot and Paperclip open source?

Yes. OpenMausBot is open source (Apache-2.0). Paperclip is open source (MIT).

Other comparisons with OpenMausBot or Paperclip

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