Launching today

Relaticle

Launching today

Open-source CRM with approval-gated AI writes

72 followers

Open-source CRM with approval-gated AI writes

72 followers

Visit website

CRM software

Most CRMs bolt AI on. Relaticle is built agent-first: any MCP client gets 37 first-party tools over OAuth, with workspace custom fields in each agent's schema automatically. The in-app assistant is stricter: every write is a proposal showing the exact change, approved record by record. Self-host everything under AGPL, including local inference with Ollama. Free forever self-hosted; Cloud is flat per-workspace pricing, not per-seat.

Free Options

Launch tags:Open Source•Artificial Intelligence•GitHub

Launch Team / Built With

Relaticle

Maker

📌

Hi Product Hunt, Manuk here. I've been building Relaticle for about two years, mostly solo. It started as a conventional open-source CRM. Then I added agents and hit a question I couldn't dodge: how much authority should each kind of client get? Read-only access was too limited to be useful. Silent writes into customer data felt wrong. I ended up with two trust levels. External MCP clients (Claude, Cursor, anything that speaks MCP) authenticate over OAuth and write directly through 37 tools, the same way an API client would. The in-app assistant works next to human users, so every write it wants becomes a proposal that shows the exact change and waits for approval. Batches are reviewed record by record: you approve or skip each one, and whatever you approved is kept. The chat client itself was rebuilt after failures I hit in real use. A rate-limited retry could delete a conversation turn. A stale stream handler could write a draft into the wrong conversation. Drafts now survive reloads, failed sends stay visible, and answers link back to the records they mention. Everything self-hosts under AGPL, including model inference with Ollama. Each workspace defines its own custom fields, and they show up in the agents' schemas automatically. One question I'm still chewing on and would genuinely like opinions on: should an in-app assistant ever get policy-based auto-approval, or should every write stay explicit?

Report

7d ago

@manukminasyan as someone who deals with messy client data all day an AI that acts as a strict proposal engine is exactly what market need. congrats for launch🙌

Report

37m ago

Relaticle

Maker

@priya_kushwaha1 Thanks, Priya! Glad this resonates with someone working with client data every day.

Report

31m ago

@manukminasyan For sure.. keep up the great work with it

Report

13m ago

@manukminasyan Congratulations on the Product Hunt launch! Wishing Relaticle a fantastic launch and lots of success ahead.

Report

23m ago

Relaticle

Maker

@charan_t_m Thanks, Charan! Really appreciate the kind words.

Report

13m ago

Mailwarm

Can you set rules so certain fields can be automatically written while others always require approval?

Report

4h ago

Relaticle

Maker

@naimz Not currently, Naim. The assistant can update your fields, but those changes still need approval. What workflow did you have in mind?

Report

3h ago

Honestly, this is the kind of CRM + AI approach that makes sense to me.

I like that the AI can actually do things instead of just generating text, but you still get to approve what changes before it touches your data.

And making the whole thing open-source + self-hostable is a huge plus. Nice work!!

Report

1h ago

Relaticle

Maker

@ilya_pashayan Thanks, Ilya! I wanted the assistant to do useful work while keeping the person using it in control. Glad that came through.

Report

1h ago

37 tools over oauth for any mcp client, and the workspace custom fields land in each agent's schema on their own. do they refresh live or only on reconnect?

Report

2h ago

Relaticle

Maker

@niveditha_patluri1 No reconnect needed, Nivy. Field changes show up the next time the agent fetches the workspace schema.

Report

2h ago

Forum Threads

p/relaticle

•

6d ago

Where should the approval line sit for AI writes in a CRM?

I am launching Relaticle here next Tuesday. It is an open-source CRM where AI agents can do real work on your data, and I want feedback on one design decision before launch day.

Relaticle has two trust levels. External agents (Claude Desktop, Cursor, any MCP client) authenticate over OAuth and write through 37 tools directly, like an API client. The in-app assistant is stricter: every write it wants to make becomes a proposal card, and a person approves or skips it record by record before anything lands.

The question I keep going back and forth on: is per-record approval the right granularity, or does it become noise once you trust the assistant? Would you want a "trust this kind of change" switch, or does that defeat the point?

If you run a CRM with any AI in it today, I would like to hear where you draw that line. The whole thing is AGPL and self-hostable, including the model via Ollama, so you can look at how it works rather than take my word for it.

View all