Head to head · Multi-agent orchestration · October 2026 research run
Orca vs Paperclip
Orca scores 57.4 (C) on agent readiness against Paperclip's 52.6 (D), and leads in 0 of 7 scored categories. Paperclip leads on schema & documentation, security & auth, payments & pricing and transparency & trust. Both do multi-agent orchestration.
Best agent harnesses and coding agents · All 1500 harnesses comparisons
Which one, for what
Orca C
Best for Developers who want an orchestrator agent to split work across parallel coding agents, on desktop or mobile.
Also in its favour
- No key needed to call it
- No incidents deducted, where Paperclip loses 15 points for them
Watch for
Anonymous usage data collected by default, with an opt-out
Best for Someone running several coding or operations agents who wants one place for tasks, budgets, approvals and history across harnesses.
Ahead on
- Schema & documentation, 81 against 65
- Security & auth, 64 against 43
- Payments & pricing, 60 against 40
- Transparency & trust, 66 against 54
Also in its favour
- Free to start without a card
Watch for
claude_local defaults dangerouslySkipPermissions to true and codex_local defaults to bypassing approvals and the sandbox, with agents running on the host
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Security & auth Paperclip +21
Orca 43
Harness reading. Anonymous usage data with an opt-out, per the README's link to its telemetry docs (15 of 30). Worktrees per agent and a sandboxed Linux build (12 of 20). No prompt-injection guidance (5). No audit log (5). A dependency-security workflow (6 of 20). 15 + 12 + 5 + 5 + 6 = 43.
Paperclip 64
Harness reading of the framework checklist, as used for the other harnesses. 30 for what leaves the machine by default, 20 for approvals and sandboxing, 15 for prompt-injection posture, 15 for audit and 20 for the security programme. Anonymous usage telemetry is on by default and goes to telemetry.paperclip.ing. The README lists what is excluded and four opt-outs, and Sentry and OpenTelemetry stay off until configured. We found no first-run notice in the CLI source (18). Board approvals for hires and strategy, execution policies and per-action connection permissions, but claude_local defaults dangerouslySkipPermissions to true, codex_local defaults to bypassing approvals and the sandbox, local agents run on the host, sandbox providers are optional plugins and the default local_trusted mode has no login (10). A documented low_trust_review preset contains agents that read untrusted pull requests or tickets. It is opt-in (10). An activity log of mutating actions, run logs, cost events and audited board API keys (14). SECURITY.md with GitHub private reporting and twelve advisories published per the 8 October check, three now with CVEs in OSV. No security.txt, bug bounty or SOC 2 report found (12).
Payments & pricing Paperclip +20
Orca 40
Scored on the cloud option. No protocol (0). The cloud price wasn't found on the pages read (0). The desktop app is free and MIT with no card (20). The local app needs no sign-up that we found (20). 0 + 0 + 20 + 20 = 40.
Paperclip 60
No payment protocol (0). Read with the self-hosted rule. The software is free under MIT with nothing to buy (20). No card and no Paperclip account (20). One npx command installs and starts it with no signup (20). Paperclip Cloud is a waitlist with no published price, so there is no paid option to score.
Schema & documentation Paperclip +16
Orca 65
Harness reading. A docs site with CLI orchestration and native chat pages (65).
Paperclip 81
The running server publishes OpenAPI at /api/openapi.json and validates requests with Zod, and the MCP server's tools take Zod schemas. No copy of the spec is published on the docs site, and paperclip.ing/openapi.json describes only the website (22). llms.txt at paperclip.ing, and docs pages answer as Markdown at .md (10). An API reference page per resource and task guides, but the MCP tool descriptions are one line each, such as List agents in a company (13). Typed inputs throughout, apart from the paperclipApiRequest tool, which takes any path under /api and a JSON body (12). cURL, JavaScript and Python examples and a status-code table, with one {error} shape and an occasional details field (12). A changelog page for every stable release and release notes in the repository, but the API path carries no version (12).
Transparency & trust Paperclip +12
Orca 54
MIT (30). Privacy and telemetry docs on the site (not read) (18 of 30). No deprecation policy (5). Disclosed with an opt-out (15 of 20). 30 + 18 + 5 + 15 = 68.
Paperclip 66
MIT (30). The privacy policy of 23 July 2026 separates self-hosted use from the hosted services and names Paperclip Labs, Inc., but keeps data as long as reasonably necessary, lists no subprocessors, and the 90-day telemetry retention appears only in source. The terms grant a broad licence over content sent to the services and allow model training on opt-in detailed telemetry (16). Release notes carry dated Breaking Changes sections and upgrade guides, with no written deprecation policy or notice period (10). The README discloses telemetry, what it excludes and four opt-outs, and the event contract is public in the repository, but it is on by default (17).
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Orca | Paperclip | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 58 | 59 | Paperclip +1 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 65 | 81 | Paperclip +16 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 70 | 70 | even |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 43 | 64 | Paperclip +21 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 40 | 60 | Paperclip +20 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 75 | 78 | Paperclip +3 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 54 | 66 | Paperclip +12 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | -15 | |
| Total | C 57.4/100 | D 52.6/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Orca | Paperclip |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | Lovecast Inc. | Paperclip Labs, Inc. |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | OAuth or key |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-11-06 | 2026-10-23 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-23 |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | 2026-07-23 |
| Customer content may train models | not read yet | yes, with an opt-out |
| Terms restrict automated access | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | not read yet | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | not read yet | yes |
| Popularity | none | 99k stars, 60k npm/wk |
How the scores have moved
Orca
No score change since it was listed.
Verdicts
Orca
An open-source orchestrator for coding agents with worker agents in their own worktrees, chat and terminal views, a browser and a CLI, on desktop and mobile, with heavy test automation. It collects anonymous usage data by default, and the cloud option's pricing wasn't found.
Paperclip
Board approvals, budgets with a hard stop and an activity log sit above whichever harnesses do the work, with ten stable versions in 90 days. The Claude Code and Codex adapters skip permission prompts and the sandbox by default, twelve security advisories have appeared since April 2026, and a 24 October cross-company read fix is in no stable release.
Before you call either
Orca
- See the telemetry docs on onorca.dev to opt out of anonymous usage data
- Use the orchestration CLI to hand a large task to one agent that starts workers
Paperclip
- Set
PAPERCLIP_TELEMETRY_DISABLED=1orDO_NOT_TRACK=1before the first start. Telemetry is on by default - Set
dangerouslySkipPermissionsanddangerouslyBypassApprovalsAndSandboxto false on agents that read untrusted input, or run them in a sandbox provider - 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
- Use
--bind lanor--bind tailnetat onboarding for anything beyond one machine. The defaultlocal_trustedmode treats every request as the board admin - 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, Orca or Paperclip?
Orca scores 57.4 (C) on agent readiness against Paperclip's 52.6 (D), and leads in 0 of 7 scored categories. Paperclip leads on schema & documentation, security & auth, payments & pricing and transparency & trust.
Are Orca and Paperclip open source?
Yes. Orca is open source (MIT). Paperclip is open source (MIT).
Other comparisons with Orca or Paperclip
- Agent Zero vs Orca
- Aider vs Orca
- Amp vs Orca
- Antigravity CLI vs Orca
- Auggie CLI vs Orca
- AXLR vs Orca
- Claude Code vs Orca
- Cline vs Orca
- Conductor vs Orca
- Crush vs Orca
- Cursor CLI vs Orca
- DeepSeek Harness (dsh) vs Orca
- dsh-superagent (DeepSeek) vs Orca
- Devin vs Orca
- Droid CLI vs Orca
- Pi vs Orca
- Emdash vs Orca
- Gemini CLI vs Orca
- GitHub Copilot CLI vs Orca
- goose vs Orca
- Harness² vs Orca
- HarnessRouter vs Orca
- Jules vs Orca
- Junie CLI vs Orca
- Kilo Code CLI vs Orca
- Kimi Code CLI vs Orca
- Kiro CLI vs Orca
- Letta vs Orca
- mini-swe-agent vs Orca
- MiniMax Code vs Orca
- Mistral Vibe CLI vs Orca
- Muse Code vs Orca
- OpenAI Agents API vs Orca
- OpenAI Codex vs Orca
- OpenCode vs Orca
- OpenHands vs Orca
- Orca vs Paseo
- Orca vs Prime Agent
- Orca vs Qoder CLI
- Orca vs Qwen Code
- Orca vs Mirror CLI
- Orca vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Orca vs Sculptor
- Orca vs T3 Code
- Orca vs Traycer
- Orca vs Unstoppable
- Orca vs Verdent
- Orca vs Vibe-Trading
- Orca vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
- Amp vs Paperclip
- Antigravity CLI vs Paperclip
- Auggie CLI vs Paperclip
- AXLR vs Paperclip
- Claude Code vs Paperclip
- Clawboo vs Orca
- Clawboo vs Paperclip
- CLI Manager vs Orca
- CLI Manager vs Paperclip
- Cline vs Paperclip
- Conductor vs Paperclip
- Crush vs Paperclip
- DeepSeek Harness (dsh) vs Paperclip
- dsh-superagent (DeepSeek) vs Paperclip
- Devin vs Paperclip
- Droid CLI vs Paperclip
- Emdash vs Paperclip
- Gemini CLI vs Paperclip
- GitHub Copilot CLI vs Paperclip
- goose vs Paperclip
- Harness vs Orca
- Harness vs Paperclip
- HarnessRouter vs Paperclip
- Jules vs Paperclip
- Junie CLI vs Paperclip
- Kilo Code CLI vs Paperclip
- Kimi Code CLI vs Paperclip
- Kiro CLI vs Paperclip
- Letta vs Paperclip
- MiniMax Code vs Paperclip
- Mistral Vibe CLI vs Paperclip
- Muse Code vs Paperclip
- OpenCode vs Paperclip
- OpenHands vs Paperclip
- OpenMausBot vs Orca
- OpenMausBot vs Paperclip
- Orca vs Parallax
- Paperclip vs Parallax
- Paperclip vs Paseo
- Paperclip vs Prime Agent
- Paperclip vs Qoder CLI
- Paperclip vs Qwen Code
- Paperclip vs Mirror CLI
- Paperclip vs Rovo Dev CLI
- Paperclip vs Sculptor
- Paperclip vs T3 Code
- Paperclip vs Traycer
- Paperclip vs Unstoppable
- Paperclip vs Verdent
- Paperclip vs Vibe-Trading
- Paperclip vs Warp (Warp Agent CLI and the Oz Agent API)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/orca-vs-paperclip.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/orca.json·/api/v1/tools/paperclip.json - From a terminal
anchor compare orca paperclip(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "orca", "b": "paperclip"}at/mcp, no key