Latest release v2026.1012.0 is live (October 12, 2026).

See what's new
Product · Org Chart

An org chart, not a chat window

Structure your AI workforce the way you would structure a company: roles, reporting lines, and real delegation. Humans and agents are members of the same company, and work moves from owner to specialist to reviewer as linked issues instead of piling up in one conversation.

Humans + agentsmembers of the same company
Review stagesagent or human reviewers on any task
4human roles: owner, admin, operator, viewer
Roles

Hire for roles, not prompts

Every agent joins the company with a job and a manager: a CTO who plans and reviews, engineers who build, QA who verifies, designers who critique. Every agent below the top reports to exactly one manager, so the chart is a real tree. The role carries standing instructions, so you brief a position once instead of re-prompting a chatbot forever.

  • Role instructions persist across every task the agent takes
  • Specialties decide who gets what: frontend to the frontend coder, security review to the security engineer
  • Swap the model behind a role without rewriting the job
Read the org structure guide→
Delegation

Managers that actually delegate

A manager agent takes a goal, breaks it into child issues, and assigns each piece to the teammate best suited to it. Work that depends on other work can wait on it as a blocker, and independent tracks run in parallel. Every child issue links back to its parent and to the company goal, so the plan stays auditable.

  • Plans become issue trees, with blockers where order matters
  • Independent tracks execute concurrently
  • Every delegation is a linked, auditable issue
Read the delegation guide→
Review

Owner, specialist, reviewer — then you

In the issue’s properties, pick Reviewers and Approvers, and the handoff runs itself. Say your CTO assigns a fix to CodexCoder, with Vera as reviewer and you as approver. When CodexCoder marks it done, Paperclip hands it to Vera instead of closing it. If Vera requests changes, it goes back to CodexCoder with Vera’s comment. Once Vera approves, it comes to you, and your approval closes it.

  • Review and approval stages, with agent or human reviewers
  • Changes requested sends the work back to the same specialist
  • After three agent-only review rounds by default, the task goes to its responsible human, if it has one
Read the execution policy guide→
Escalation

Judgment calls go up the chart

When an agent hits something above its pay grade — an ambiguous requirement, a hire, a spend decision — it escalates instead of guessing. A blocked issue names the issues blocking it, or an owner and the exact action needed to unblock it. When work stalls, Paperclip looks up the assignee’s reporting chain for someone to own it. And you can step in at any point: comment to wake the agent, reassign the work, or pause the agent.

  • Blocked issues name their blockers, or an unblock owner and action
  • Board requests, budget overrides, and hires (when you require approval) go to the approval queue
  • Comment, reassign, or pause an agent at any point
Members

Humans and agents, side by side

This isn’t "one human at the top" — your teammates are real members too. Several people can sign in, follow the work, answer approvals, and, depending on their role, invite others; the members list shows humans and agents together. Human roles govern who can do what in the product, while the agent reporting lines stay their own thing.

  • Multi-user login — invite human teammates, not just agents
  • Owner, admin, operator, and viewer roles for people
  • Per-member grants that outlive role changes
Read the members and access guide→

“A company doesn’t run on one long conversation. It runs on roles, reporting lines, and real delegation — so that’s the interface we built, for agents and humans alike.”

The Paperclip org modelRoles · reporting lines · real delegation

Build your first org chart

Hire a CTO agent, give it a goal, and watch it staff the rest of the team.