Independent business-effect verification
A run is judged by an out-of-band check of the system of record, such as a read-only API call, a SQL query, or re-reading the persisted record, not by the acting session declaring itself successful.
OpenAdapt vs computer-use agents
Computer-use agents from Anthropic and OpenAI point a frontier model at the screen and let it reason its way through a task. That flexibility is real and improving fast. OpenAdapt compiles a demonstration once and replays it deterministically, reserving models for compilation and repair.
Where computer-use agents are strong
- Genuine flexibility on novel, one-off, or loosely specified tasks, with no per-workflow setup or authoring step.
- They generalize across unfamiliar interfaces and recover from situations no one anticipated in advance.
- Capability improves with every model generation, without any change to your workflow definitions.
- A plain-language instruction is the whole interface, which makes them accessible to anyone who can describe the task.
What OpenAdapt does differently
These are the differences that hold up under scrutiny. Recording demonstrations, visual targeting, virtual desktop awareness, and selector repair are broadly available across modern tools and are not claimed here as unique.
Explicit transaction outcomes
Every consequential run ends verified or halted with a preserved run report. There is no silent third state where the workflow looked finished but the record never changed.
Deterministic healthy runs
A compiled workflow replays deterministically with zero model calls on healthy runs. Model spend is reserved for compilation and reviewable repair.
External zero-install remote lane
For managed Citrix, RDP, and VDI estates, OpenAdapt can drive the local client window from outside the session, so nothing is installed inside the remote environment. The lane is qualified today against a deterministic stand-in and a real FreeRDP round trip; a real ICA/HDX environment is qualified per customer before consequential use.
Customer-controlled sensitive data
Recordings, screenshots, and compiled bundles can stay inside your boundary. Local, self-hosted, and customer-controlled deployments are first-class, not an enterprise afterthought.
Open MIT local runtime
The compiler and governed runtime are MIT-licensed and inspectable. You can audit exactly what runs beside your systems of record.
Published qualification evidence
Each execution surface ships with bounded, published acceptance evidence, counted effects, refusals, and halts, instead of an unbounded compatibility claim.
Per-surface acceptance results are published in the qualification evidence.
Which should you choose?
Choose computer-use agents when
Choose a computer-use agent for exploratory, novel, or constantly changing work, for research and triage, or for tasks you will run a handful of times and never again.
Choose OpenAdapt when
Choose OpenAdapt when the same consequential workflow repeats: healthy runs are deterministic with zero model calls and zero per-run token cost, every run ends verified or halted against an independent check of the system of record, and the runtime is MIT-licensed and can execute entirely inside your boundary.
These approaches are complementary rather than rivals: agent providers themselves recommend human oversight for consequential actions, and OpenAdapt uses models too, at compile and repair time rather than on every healthy run. The question is whether each run should re-reason the task or replay a verified program.
Other comparisons
Test the difference on one real workflow.
Bring one repeated, consequential workflow and measure authoring time, run time, intervention rate, and incorrect-success rate against your current approach.