Sourced profile

OpenHandsby OpenHands (company name not stated on pages fetched).

OpenHands is an open-source platform for software-engineering agents, with a GUI, CLI, SDK and enterprise control plane (openhands.dev).

Verified October 13, 2026

This profile was compiled by Beag Labs, which makes a competing product (Papyrus). It is built from public documentation, not hands-on testing, and every statement links to its source.

At a glance

Evidence coverage
7 / 8

attributes with a sourced answer, 1 only partially supported

Cited claims
7

records in the Claim Ledger

Documentation gaps
1

attributes not documented in sources checked

Deployment
  • Hybrid
Licensing
  • Open source
Azure Marketplace
  • Not documented
Last verified
October 13, 2026

Profile, attribute by attribute.

What it does

Verified

Coding agents via Agent Canvas (browser client), Software Agent SDK/Agent Server, CLI, plus scheduled/webhook automations.

Source: BL-CLM-47 ↗

Does not establish: Feature description only; the Local GUI is described as deprecated in favor of Agent Canvas, which the repo labels beta.

Deployment model

Verified

Local/self-hosted (npm, Docker), plus OpenHands Cloud (managed) and OpenHands Enterprise (licensed self-host in your VPC or managed).

Source: BL-CLM-48 ↗

Does not establish: Customer-tenant deployment is listed under the commercial Enterprise plan only.

Azure Marketplace offer

Not documented

No Azure/Microsoft Marketplace listing found for OpenHands in first-party pages or search.

4 sources checked

Does not establish: A failed search is not proof no listing exists; the marketplace was not searched directly.

Human approval

Partially supported

SDK confirmation policies (always, never, risky) can require approval of actions; documented for the SDK, and one call path bypasses them.

Source: BL-CLM-49 ↗

Does not establish: Documented for the SDK; the page says execute_tool() bypasses these controls. Not checked for Cloud/Canvas UI or defaults.

Licensing

Verified

Root LICENSE of OpenHands/OpenHands is MIT (OpenHands contributors, 2025). Docs say each repository has its own license.

Source: BL-CLM-50 ↗

Does not establish: Not verified: the SDK repo license, and whether an enterprise directory carries a different license (enterprise/LICENSE URL returned 404). OpenHands Cloud/Enterprise are commercial offerings.

Security controls

Verified

Docs name: Docker sandbox isolation for the agent server, security analyzers with risk levels, Enterprise SAML/SSO, RBAC and access controls (Cloud).

Source: BL-CLM-51 ↗

Does not establish: SECURITY.md returned 404, so no vulnerability-disclosure policy was found. Pricing page does not explicitly tie RBAC to a tier. Audit logging, certifications not found on pages read.

Intended buyer

Verified

Developers and engineering teams, including enterprises wanting control over models, data, access and auditability.

Source: BL-CLM-52 ↗

Does not establish: Marketing positioning only.

Public pricing

Verified

Local open source: free. SaaS Individual: free, 10 daily conversations. Enterprise: custom pricing, contact sales.

Source: BL-CLM-53 ↗

Does not establish: Enterprise price, SLA and contract terms not published. Model usage at cost or BYOK; amounts not stated in fetched summary. Page may have other tiers not captured.

May fit well when

May fit less well when

Methodology and disclosure

How these comparisons are built and checked.

We disclose our interest

Beag Labs makes Papyrus, one of the platforms compared here. Papyrus cells cite our own pages and are labelled first-party. Read every comparison with that in mind.

Every statement is cited

Each Verified or Not supported cell links to a record in the Claim Ledger with the source URL, where on the page it appears, the date we checked it, approved wording, and what it does not prove.

Documentation, not hands-on testing

These comparisons are built from vendor documentation, official listings and repositories. Beag Labs has not run hands-on tests of the compared products. We classify what is documented; we do not score or rank quality, and nothing here is a benchmark.

Missing documentation is not a missing feature

If we cannot find a capability in official sources we say Not documented and list what we checked. We only say Not supported or Partially supported when a source itself says so.

Verified
An official source we fetched states it. The cell links to the claim record.
Partially supported
An official source documents the capability but states a limit: one surface, a subset of actions, or an explicit exclusion. The cell says what the limit is.
Not documented
We checked official sources and found nothing either way. This is not evidence the capability is absent.
Not supported
An official source explicitly says the capability is absent or unsupported.