Design / Viber vs Clawdbot

OpenViber vs OpenClaw

OpenViber is intentionally openclaw-alike in direction: local workspace ownership, durable context, and practical operator workflows.

Shared ground

  • local-first context directories (~/.openviber, ~/.openclaw style),
  • skills/instructions driven workflows,
  • emphasis on real tool execution over pure prompt-only chat.

OpenViber emphasis

  • unit of deployment is a viber (subordinate companion on one machine),
  • explicit manager/subordinate contract and periodic reporting,
  • terminal-first observability (tmux) with chat-first intervention,
  • budget-aware execution as first-class runtime constraint,
  • human-perspective verification with evidence required.

OpenClaw emphasis (general)

  • strong baseline for local assistant runtime and workspace conventions,
  • robust practical patterns for coding and automation workflows.

Practical takeaway

OpenViber should remain compatible in spirit with OpenClaw patterns while specializing in:

  1. subordinate-style autonomy,
  2. reporting discipline,
  3. intervention ergonomics,
  4. evidence-based acceptance.