{"passport":{"unfragile":{"@version":"1.0","version":"2026-05","artifact":{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude","slug":"gitlawb--openclaude","name":"openclaude","type":"agent","url":"https://openclaude.gitlawb.com","page_url":"https://unfragile.ai/gitlawb--openclaude","categories":["ai-agents"],"tags":["ai","ai-agent","ai-tools","cli","coding"],"pricing":{"model":"open_source","free":true,"starting_price":null},"status":"active","verified":false},"capabilities":[{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_0","uri":"capability://tool.use.integration.multi.provider.llm.agent.orchestration.with.unified.interface","name":"multi-provider llm agent orchestration with unified interface","description":"Abstracts multiple LLM providers (Claude, OpenAI, local models via Ollama) behind a single agent interface, routing requests based on model availability and configuration. Uses a provider-agnostic message protocol that translates between different API schemas (Anthropic's messages API, OpenAI's chat completions, local inference formats) at runtime, enabling seamless model switching without code changes.","intents":["Run the same agent code against Claude, GPT-4, or local Llama without rewriting prompts or logic","Fallback to alternative providers if primary model is unavailable or rate-limited","Evaluate agent performance across different LLM backends with identical task definitions"],"best_for":["Teams building LLM agents who want provider flexibility and cost optimization","Developers prototyping multi-model strategies without vendor lock-in","Organizations evaluating open-source vs proprietary model tradeoffs"],"limitations":["Provider-specific features (vision, function calling schemas) require adapter code per provider","Token counting and cost estimation varies by provider — no unified metering","Latency differences between providers (local Ollama vs cloud APIs) not automatically optimized"],"requires":["TypeScript/Node.js 18+","API keys for desired providers (Anthropic, OpenAI) OR local Ollama instance","Environment variables or config file for provider credentials"],"input_types":["text prompts","structured JSON agent definitions","conversation history with role/content pairs"],"output_types":["text responses","structured tool calls","agent action sequences"],"categories":["tool-use-integration","multi-provider-abstraction"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_1","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.cli.driven.agent.execution.with.file.system.integration","name":"cli-driven agent execution with file system integration","description":"Exposes agent capabilities through a command-line interface that reads task definitions from files, executes agents with file I/O capabilities, and writes results back to the file system. The CLI layer implements a file-watching pattern for continuous agent execution and integrates with shell environments, allowing agents to be triggered from scripts, cron jobs, or CI/CD pipelines without requiring programmatic API calls.","intents":["Run agents from shell scripts or automation workflows without writing Node.js code","Chain multiple agent executions together using standard Unix pipes and file redirection","Integrate agents into existing DevOps tooling and CI/CD systems"],"best_for":["DevOps engineers and SREs automating infrastructure tasks with AI agents","Non-JavaScript developers who want to use agents from bash/shell environments","Teams with existing CLI-based tooling who want to add AI capabilities"],"limitations":["CLI argument parsing limits complex nested configurations — JSON files required for sophisticated agent definitions","File I/O latency becomes bottleneck for high-frequency agent invocations (>10/sec)","No built-in streaming output for long-running agent tasks — results buffered until completion"],"requires":["Node.js 18+ with npm or yarn","Bash/shell environment (Linux, macOS, WSL on Windows)","Read/write permissions on target directories for file I/O"],"input_types":["CLI arguments","JSON configuration files","text files","stdin piped data"],"output_types":["stdout text","JSON result files","exit codes"],"categories":["automation-workflow","cli-interface"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_2","uri":"capability://tool.use.integration.tool.function.calling.with.dynamic.schema.registration","name":"tool/function calling with dynamic schema registration","description":"Enables agents to invoke external tools and APIs by registering function schemas that are passed to the LLM, which then decides when and how to call them. Uses a schema-based function registry where developers define tool signatures (parameters, return types, descriptions) once, and the system automatically translates between the agent's tool-call decisions and actual function invocations, handling parameter validation and error propagation.","intents":["Let agents autonomously decide to call APIs, shell commands, or custom functions based on task requirements","Define reusable tool libraries that multiple agents can leverage without code duplication","Safely constrain agent capabilities by explicitly registering allowed tools and their parameters"],"best_for":["Developers building autonomous agents that need to interact with external systems","Teams creating tool libraries for agents to use across multiple projects","Organizations requiring explicit tool whitelisting for security/compliance"],"limitations":["Schema validation adds ~50-100ms per tool invocation for parameter checking","LLM hallucination of tool names/parameters not prevented — requires explicit error handling in agent logic","No built-in retry logic for failed tool calls — agents must implement recovery strategies"],"requires":["TypeScript or JavaScript runtime","Function definitions with JSDoc or TypeScript type annotations","Provider support for tool calling (Claude with tool_use, OpenAI with function_calling)"],"input_types":["function signatures","JSON schemas","TypeScript type definitions"],"output_types":["tool invocation results","structured error responses","execution logs"],"categories":["tool-use-integration","function-calling"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_3","uri":"capability://planning.reasoning.agentic.reasoning.with.multi.step.task.decomposition","name":"agentic reasoning with multi-step task decomposition","description":"Implements a planning-reasoning loop where agents break down complex tasks into subtasks, execute them sequentially or in parallel, and adapt based on intermediate results. Uses a state machine pattern where agent state transitions between planning, execution, and reflection phases, with each phase producing artifacts (task lists, execution results, error analyses) that inform subsequent decisions.","intents":["Decompose a high-level goal (e.g., 'analyze codebase and suggest refactorings') into concrete steps the agent executes","Handle failures gracefully by reflecting on what went wrong and adjusting the plan","Maintain context across multiple tool calls and LLM invocations for coherent multi-step workflows"],"best_for":["Developers building agents for complex, multi-step tasks like code analysis or data processing","Teams needing agents that can recover from failures and adapt plans dynamically","Projects where task transparency and auditability are important (seeing the agent's reasoning steps)"],"limitations":["Each reasoning step adds LLM latency — complex tasks may require 5-10 API calls, adding 5-20 seconds total","Agent may get stuck in loops if reflection doesn't improve plan quality — requires explicit loop-breaking logic","Token usage scales with task complexity — long reasoning chains consume 2-3x tokens vs single-shot approaches"],"requires":["LLM provider with sufficient context window (8k+ tokens recommended)","Structured prompt engineering for planning and reflection phases","Error handling and timeout logic for long-running agent loops"],"input_types":["high-level task descriptions","context documents","execution constraints"],"output_types":["task decomposition plans","execution logs with step-by-step results","final outcomes with reasoning traces"],"categories":["planning-reasoning","agent-orchestration"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_4","uri":"capability://tool.use.integration.local.model.support.via.ollama.integration","name":"local model support via ollama integration","description":"Integrates with Ollama to run open-source language models (Llama, Mistral, etc.) locally without cloud API calls. Implements a provider adapter that translates agent requests into Ollama's REST API format, handles model loading/unloading, and manages local inference with configurable parameters (temperature, context window, quantization levels).","intents":["Run agents entirely on-premises without sending data to cloud LLM providers","Reduce inference costs by using free open-source models instead of paid APIs","Experiment with different model architectures (Llama 2, Mistral, Phi) without code changes"],"best_for":["Organizations with data privacy requirements that prohibit cloud LLM usage","Developers with GPU hardware who want to minimize API costs","Researchers comparing performance across different open-source model architectures"],"limitations":["Inference latency 5-10x slower than cloud APIs (depends on GPU; CPU-only is 50-100x slower)","Requires significant local compute resources (8GB+ VRAM for 7B models, 24GB+ for 13B)","Model quality generally lower than Claude/GPT-4 — agents may make more errors or require more detailed prompts","No built-in model quantization — users must pre-quantize models or accept full precision memory overhead"],"requires":["Ollama installed and running (https://ollama.ai)","GPU with CUDA/Metal support recommended (CPU inference viable but slow)","8GB+ available VRAM for 7B models, 24GB+ for 13B models","Ollama API endpoint accessible (default localhost:11434)"],"input_types":["text prompts","agent task definitions"],"output_types":["text responses","tool calls (if model supports)"],"categories":["tool-use-integration","local-inference"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_5","uri":"capability://code.generation.editing.context.aware.code.analysis.and.generation","name":"context-aware code analysis and generation","description":"Agents can analyze source code by reading files, understanding syntax and structure, and generating code modifications or new implementations. Uses language-specific parsing (likely AST-based for JavaScript/TypeScript) to understand code structure, enabling agents to make targeted edits rather than naive text replacements, and to reason about code semantics (variable scope, function dependencies, type information).","intents":["Analyze a codebase to identify refactoring opportunities, security issues, or performance bottlenecks","Generate code completions or new functions that integrate with existing code structure","Automatically fix bugs or apply code transformations across multiple files"],"best_for":["Development teams using agents for code review and refactoring automation","Solo developers wanting AI-assisted code generation that understands their project structure","Organizations automating code quality improvements and technical debt reduction"],"limitations":["Code analysis limited to languages with available parsers — TypeScript/JavaScript well-supported, other languages may use regex-based analysis","Large codebases (>100k LOC) may exceed LLM context windows — requires file-by-file or module-level analysis","Generated code may not compile or pass tests — requires integration with build/test systems for validation"],"requires":["Source code files accessible to agent (local filesystem or git repository)","Language-specific parser for accurate AST analysis (built-in for TypeScript/JavaScript)","LLM with sufficient context window for code snippets (8k+ tokens)"],"input_types":["source code files","code snippets","file paths and directory structures"],"output_types":["code modifications","analysis reports","generated code files"],"categories":["code-generation-editing","code-analysis"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_6","uri":"capability://memory.knowledge.persistent.agent.state.and.memory.management","name":"persistent agent state and memory management","description":"Maintains agent state across multiple invocations, including conversation history, task progress, and learned context. Implements a state persistence layer that serializes agent state (current task, completed steps, tool results) to disk or external storage, enabling agents to resume interrupted tasks and maintain long-term memory of previous interactions.","intents":["Resume a long-running agent task that was interrupted without losing progress","Maintain conversation context across multiple separate agent invocations","Learn from previous task executions to improve future performance"],"best_for":["Teams running long-lived agents that may be interrupted or restarted","Applications requiring multi-turn agent interactions with persistent context","Workflows where agent decisions should be informed by historical execution data"],"limitations":["State serialization adds latency (~100-500ms per save depending on state size)","No built-in distributed state management — single-machine deployments only","State bloat over time if old history is not pruned — requires explicit cleanup logic"],"requires":["Persistent storage (filesystem, database, or cloud storage)","Serialization format (JSON, SQLite, etc.) for state snapshots","Cleanup/archival strategy for old state to prevent unbounded growth"],"input_types":["agent state objects","conversation history"],"output_types":["serialized state snapshots","state recovery data"],"categories":["memory-knowledge","state-management"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0},{"id":"github-gitlawb--openclaude__cap_7","uri":"capability://automation.workflow.error.handling.and.graceful.degradation","name":"error handling and graceful degradation","description":"Implements comprehensive error handling throughout the agent lifecycle, including LLM API failures, tool execution errors, and invalid agent decisions. Uses a fallback strategy pattern where agents can retry failed operations, switch to alternative tools/providers, or escalate to human intervention when recovery is not possible.","intents":["Handle transient failures (rate limits, network timeouts) without crashing the agent","Gracefully degrade functionality when certain tools or providers are unavailable","Provide clear error messages and recovery suggestions to users or downstream systems"],"best_for":["Production agent deployments requiring high reliability and uptime","Teams building agents that must handle unpredictable external dependencies","Applications where agent failures should not cascade to user-facing errors"],"limitations":["Retry logic adds latency — exponential backoff can delay task completion by 30-60 seconds for heavily rate-limited APIs","Fallback strategies may produce lower-quality results than primary approach","Human escalation requires external workflow integration — not built-in"],"requires":["Error handling configuration (retry counts, backoff strategies)","Fallback tool/provider definitions","Logging infrastructure for error tracking and debugging"],"input_types":["error events","retry policies"],"output_types":["error logs","recovery actions","escalation signals"],"categories":["automation-workflow","error-handling"],"confidence":0.5,"matches":0,"success_rate":0}],"trust":{"score":48,"verified":false,"data_access_risk":"high","permissions":["TypeScript/Node.js 18+","API keys for desired providers (Anthropic, OpenAI) OR local Ollama instance","Environment variables or config file for provider credentials","Node.js 18+ with npm or yarn","Bash/shell environment (Linux, macOS, WSL on Windows)","Read/write permissions on target directories for file I/O","TypeScript or JavaScript runtime","Function definitions with JSDoc or TypeScript type annotations","Provider support for tool calling (Claude with tool_use, OpenAI with function_calling)","LLM provider with sufficient context window (8k+ tokens recommended)"],"failure_modes":["Provider-specific features (vision, function calling schemas) require adapter code per provider","Token counting and cost estimation varies by provider — no unified metering","Latency differences between providers (local Ollama vs cloud APIs) not automatically optimized","CLI argument parsing limits complex nested configurations — JSON files required for sophisticated agent definitions","File I/O latency becomes bottleneck for high-frequency agent invocations (>10/sec)","No built-in streaming output for long-running agent tasks — results buffered until completion","Schema validation adds ~50-100ms per tool invocation for parameter checking","LLM hallucination of tool names/parameters not prevented — requires explicit error handling in agent logic","No built-in retry logic for failed tool calls — agents must implement recovery strategies","Each reasoning step adds LLM latency — complex tasks may require 5-10 API calls, adding 5-20 seconds total","builder identity is not verified yet","no observed match outcomes yet"],"rank_breakdown":{"adoption":0.7960216060497993,"quality":0.26,"ecosystem":0.55,"match_graph":0.25,"freshness":0.75,"weights":{"adoption":0.25,"quality":0.25,"ecosystem":0.1,"match_graph":0.28,"freshness":0.12}},"observed_outcomes":{"matches":0,"success_rate":0,"avg_confidence":0,"top_intents":[],"last_matched_at":null},"maintenance":{"status":"active","updated_at":"2026-05-24T12:16:21.550Z","last_scraped_at":"2026-05-03T13:57:04.027Z","last_commit":"2026-05-02T23:19:40Z"},"community":{"stars":25602,"forks":8252,"weekly_downloads":null,"model_downloads":null,"model_likes":null}},"distribution":{"claim_url":"https://unfragile.ai/submit?claim=gitlawb--openclaude","compare_url":"https://unfragile.ai/compare?artifact=gitlawb--openclaude"}},"signature":"lAXiQwMPO/P90LuzfsQ/iB3bhmobzGrS//J0qnek1g7B/4XzCr66uoMyFYTb+x/opAQ3XvBeoxm8pjaTfGy+AA==","signedAt":"2026-06-21T11:44:35.176Z","signedBy":"unfragile.ai","version":1},"_links":{"self":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/passport/gitlawb--openclaude","artifact":"https://unfragile.ai/gitlawb--openclaude","verify":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/verify?slug=gitlawb--openclaude","publicKey":"https://unfragile.ai/api/v1/trust-passport-public-key","spec":"https://unfragile.ai/trust","schema":"https://unfragile.ai/schema.json","docs":"https://unfragile.ai/docs"}}