brigade vs paperclip
Self-hosted crew of AI agents on an org chart sharing one long-term memory: delegation, mid-task model switching, 1,000+ app connectors, reachable from terminal, WhatsApp, Telegram or Slack. — versus — Open-source control plane for running fleets of heterogeneous AI agents as a "company" — bring your own agent, assign goals, org charts, budgets, governance, and an audited ticket system.
Both run agents on an org chart; paperclip is a control plane for company-scale fleets with budgets and governance, Brigade a single owner's personal crew.
| brigade | paperclip | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 11k | 99k |
| Forks | 70 | 17k |
| Language | TypeScript | TypeScript |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Last activity | 2 days ago | 3 days ago |
| Topics | agents, orchestration | agents, orchestration |
| Curated connections | 3 | 10 |
brigade — the curator's take
For one owner who wants a personal multi-agent assistant they host themselves — reuses your Claude/ChatGPT/Copilot sign-in, approval-gated privileged actions, no telemetry. The README is heavy on vibes (the 'Bloody Benchmark' is a public tunnel, not a benchmark), so judge the code, not the copy. One lean agent on a $5 VPS? picobot is simpler. Company-scale fleets with budgets and governance? paperclip.
paperclip — the curator's take
Reach for Paperclip when you run many agents across providers 24/7 and need a boss layer — budgets that hard-stop, org charts, goal alignment, audit trail, mobile monitoring. Sweet spot: "20 Claude Code tabs, lost track of who does what." NOT the tool to build an agent (it orchestrates ones you already have), and overkill for a single agent or one linear pipeline. It's a control plane, not a framework.