Launching today
BetterClaw
Deploy AI Agent, 60 seconds & $0 forever
5.0•11 reviews•421 followers
Deploy AI Agent, 60 seconds & $0 forever
5.0•11 reviews•421 followers
BetterClaw is a no-code platform for building AI agents that run on a schedule without you. Connect Gmail, Slack, or Telegram, and your agent triages inbox, sends morning briefings, or monitors what you care about. Agents start as Interns that ask before acting. Bring your own AI key and it's genuinely $0.
BetterClaw
Hey PH, I'm Shabz, one of the people behind BetterClaw.
BetterClaw is a no-code platform for building AI agents that actually run on their own. Connect your tools, describe what you want, and it's live in 60 seconds.
Why we built it
I spent months in the OpenClaw subreddit helping people set up their agents. Hundreds of them.
And the pattern was always the same.
Someone discovers AI agents. Gets genuinely excited. Their eyes light up when their agent sends its first message.
Then they lose an entire weekend to Docker and config files.
And they're gone before week two.
The AI part was incredible. The infrastructure part was quietly killing it.
So we kept asking: why should anyone need to become a sysadmin just to use an AI agent?
They shouldn't. So we removed that part entirely.
What makes it different
60-second deploy - no Docker, no YAML, no VPS, no terminal. We timed it.
95+ one-click OAuth integrations - Gmail, Calendar, Slack, HubSpot, GitHub, Jira, Meta Ads, Linear and more. Real OAuth, not "paste a webhook and pray."
Trust levels - every agent starts as an Intern that asks permission for everything. Promote it to Specialist, then Lead, as it earns your trust. Handing an AI full system access on day one is wild, and somehow that's the default everywhere else.
Secrets auto-purge - AES-256 encrypted, and gone from agent memory after 5 minutes.
BYOK, zero markup - bring your own LLM key. Pair it with a free model (Gemini, OpenRouter, Groq) and your total cost is genuinely $0.
Not "$0 but you need a server." Zero.
Who it's for
Founders, ops and support teams, recruiters, agencies, and tbh, anyone non-tech who's tired of doing the same thing 50 times a week.
What people are building
Meta + Google Ads spend vs Stripe revenue → daily ROAS in Slack
Gmail lead → scored, enriched into HubSpot, call booked
Zendesk tickets → answered from your product data, only edge cases escalated
Search Console → finds page-one pages losing clicks (grew our own site 1.6K → 7.9K clicks in a month)
Stripe declines → follow-up drafted, recovery tracked
PostHog drop-off → cross-checked in Salesforce → owner pinged pre-renewal
Huge thanks to @rohanrecommends for hunting us, and to the PH team for building a place where small teams get a real shot
And to Tina, Varsha, Aniket and everyone who poured months into this - this one's yours too. ❤️
🎁 For PH folks: use code PH3 for 3 months of Pro at $49.
We'd genuinely love your feedback - especially on what you'd want an agent to handle first. I'll be in the comments all day. Ask me anything, including the stuff we haven't figured out yet. 👇
→ betterclaw.io
@better_shaya Congrats on the launch, Shabnam! The "simple and secure" combo is the hard part with agent deployment — curious how you're handling permissioning/sandboxing for agents in a shared workspace?
BetterClaw
@chetan00118 Great Question Chetan. Each agent gets a secure container, with its own filesystem. Agent within same workspace get separate container.
All secrets/connector calls are proxied through third party systems, Oauth tokens are never touched by agents.
BetterClaw
@better_shaya @chetan00118 Thanks Chetan
Ctruh Studio
@rohanrecommends @better_shaya All the best for the launch! Following this. :)
BetterClaw
@rohanrecommends @better_shaya @sharun_kanan Thanks Sharun!! Means a lot
BetterClaw
@rohanrecommends @sharun_kanan Thanks a lot Sharun for supporting the launch :)
@rohanrecommends @better_shaya Congratulations on the launch!! Very good onboarding flow.
PicWish
@rohanrecommends @better_shaya when using the 95+ oauth connections, what happens if an API rate limits the agent midtask?
BetterClaw
@rohanrecommends @mohsinproduct This is a great edge case and we encountered this while testing ourselves. The sub-agents/agent will wait on the timeout (assuming its within limits of few mins, else escalate the same to human)
BetterClaw
@mohsinproduct good question. we hit this a lot during testing ourselves. the agent doesn't crash or lose progress, it waits and retries gracefully. if it can't resolve it escalates to you instead of guessing 👍
The "Interns that ask before acting" model is the right instinct, most agent tools skip that approval step entirely. Question on the other side of it: once an Intern acts on something external, an email sent, a Slack message posted, how do you verify the action actually landed rather than trusting the connector's own success response? I've spent today running browser automation and roughly one in three actions reported success while nothing actually happened, a click that never navigated, a submit that never posted. Curious whether BetterClaw checks real downstream state after an agent acts, or trusts the tool call's response.
BetterClaw
@abdullah_javaid3 That’s a really good question. We’re definitely conscious of the gap between a tool returning “success” and the action actually taking effect. The goal with BetterClaw is to verify the downstream state where possible rather than blindly trusting the connector response. That distinction is a big part of making agents reliable enough to run unattended.
BetterClaw
@abdullah_javaid3 partially, and not as well as we'd like.
For OAuth connectors we're in decent shape, mostly because those APIs hand back an identifier on success. A sent email returns a message ID, a Slack post returns a timestamp and channel. Where that ID exists we verify against it rather than trusting a 200, and if the response claims success without one, we treat it as failed and escalate.
Where we don't do this well is exactly the case you're describing. Our Chrome integration is in beta and it trusts the tool call more than it should. Your one-in-three number tracks with what we saw in testing. A click that resolves cleanly but navigates nowhere is genuinely hard to catch without checking real post-action state, and we haven't built that properly yet.
What partly covers us today is that Intern level means a human sees most actions before they fire, so silent failures surface as "wait, that didn't happen" rather than compounding quietly. That's a workaround, not a fix. It stops helping the moment someone promotes to Lead and walks away.
@better_shaya That's the gap that matters most, since Lead is the whole point of building this. Would you hold Chrome integration at Intern permanently until post action verification is built, or is a human in the loop an acceptable permanent tradeoff for browser actions specifically, even once other connector types graduate?
BetterClaw
@abdullah_javaid3 Yes, and I think that's the right call rather than a temporary one.
Chrome automation is a fundamentally different reliability class from OAuth connectors. An API either returns you an ID or it doesn't. A browser action can succeed, report success, and have accomplished nothing, and there's no artifact to check against. Even with post-action verification built, you're comparing DOM state against an expectation you inferred, which is a weaker guarantee than "the API handed me a message ID."
So where I've landed: Chrome stays gated at Intern until verification exists, and even after that I'd expect it to graduate to something like Specialist rather than Lead. Human-in-the-loop as a permanent tradeoff for browser actions specifically, while API-backed connectors go all the way up.
The thing I'm less sure about is whether that should be enforced or advisory. Right now trust levels are the user's call, and hard-locking a capability cuts against that. Leaning toward enforced for browser actions and clearly labeled as to why, because "you can promote this but you probably shouldn't" is a warning nobody reads.
Open to being wrong on that. If browser verification gets reliable enough that Lead is genuinely safe, I'd rather not have shipped an artificial ceiling.
@better_shaya The asymmetry is what tips it for me. An advisory cap that gets ignored just means someone hits a wall they can route around. A silent failure at Lead means someone believes an action happened when it did not, and finds out whenever the downstream damage shows up, not when the agent ran. That is the same one-in-three problem from earlier, just moved one trust level up with nobody watching it live. Annoying an early adopter who wants to skip ahead costs you a complaint. Shipping a Lead-level agent that occasionally fails invisibly costs you the thing the whole product is selling, that it can be trusted unattended.
BetterClaw
@michael_vavilov Thanks! This is the part we went back and forth on the most.
Right now promotion is manual, not automatic. You review what the agent's been doing and promote it when you're comfortable. We deliberately didn't auto-promote on "X approvals in a row" because approving 20 low-stakes actions doesn't tell you much about how it'll handle the 21st one that actually matters. The trust you build watching it work is more informative than a counter.
BetterClaw
@michael_vavilov Thanks Michael 🙌 Right now you set the level yourself rather than the agent earning it, so you can move an agent up or down anytime based on how much you trust it with a task. Auto-promotion off a clean approval streak is something we've been kicking around though.
Swytchcode
This is intersting. Does it also clean unwanted notifications after summarizing..... like I love to see Linkedin notifications. But deleting all of them manually is a task. Can you do that?
BetterClaw
@chilarai We can do that. We have an integration for chrome (in beta), which can connect with local chrome instance and take any action you would like it to take autonomously
I like the idea of scheduled agent handling small repetitive task without needing another dashboard open all day.
BetterClaw
@awesome_america Thanks Amelia! That was honestly the whole motivation. Most automation tools just move the work rather than remove it, you end up checking a dashboard to see if the thing that was supposed to save you time actually ran.
Ours reports into wherever you already are. Slack, Telegram, email. If nothing needs your attention, you don't hear from it. That felt like the right default :)
BetterClaw
@awesome_america heartbeat scheduling was one of the first features we built because we were tired of agents running 24/7 when they only needed to work twice a day. glad that clicked with you 😊
BetterClaw
@awesome_america Thanks Amelia! That's honestly the feature we lean on most ourselves. We have one agent that pulls our search data three times a week and drops a summary in Slack. Nobody opens a dashboard for it anymore.
SoundGate Guitar
As an agent gets promoted from Intern to Specialist/Lead, can you set granular custom rules for what actions trigger a permission prompt, or is it based on predefined roles? Super excited to see where you take this!
BetterClaw
@aren_barseghyan Right now it's role-based rather than fully granular. Each trust level has a defined scope, and skills are toggled individually per agent, so you can restrict what an agent can touch even at a higher level.
What you're describing, custom rules for what specifically triggers a prompt, is the thing we keep coming back to. Something like "always ask before anything leaves the company" or "ask on any action touching a contact tagged VIP." That's more useful than a blanket level because the risk isn't uniform across actions.
Not built yet. It's the most requested thing from this thread so far. Curious what rule you'd want first, that would help us pick where to start.
I ran into what seems like a loop bug when retrying the agents. I initially tried it with a Groq API key, and even after switching to a Gemini API key, I kept getting the same error:
“The agent hit an unexpected error while responding.”
I’m not sure if the issue is with my API keys or something else in the retry flow, but sharing it here in case it helps you guys identify what’s going on
BetterClaw
@matheusdsantosr_dev Thanks for flagging this properly, that's a genuinely useful report.
The fact that it persisted across both Groq and Gemini keys suggests it's not your keys, it's likely something in our retry flow swallowing the real error and surfacing a generic message instead. That string is far too vague to be useful to you, which is on us.
Could you reach out to hello@betterclaw.io, or use the support button on the left-hand side in the app? That gets it to the team with your agent ID attached so we can pull the actual gateway logs and see what's hiding behind that message.
In the meantime, if you want to unblock: try spinning up a fresh agent rather than retrying the existing one. If it's stuck in a retry loop it'll usually keep hitting the same wall.