Giselle

A visual AI workflow builder for product-delivery and GitHub automation work.

Stars
★ 559
Last updated
3d ago
License
Apache-2.0
Primary language
TypeScript

At a glance

How it runs
Self-hosted serviceHosted service
Works with
Universal · cross-platformOpenAI API · Claude API
Cost
Free tier plus a paid hosted plan
Setup effort
Low · running in minutes
You'll need
pnpmat least one OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google AI API keyShell / CLINetwork accessLocal filesystem
Typical use
An engineering team that wants AI automation around GitHub issues, pull requests, or deployments.
Not a fit if
  • Teams that need fully offline or local-model operation
  • Teams waiting for Team Collaboration and Template Hub to ship
  • Teams needing documented GitHub permissions and token setup

What does this agent do, and when should you use it?

Giselle is an open-source AI app builder for agentic workflows and human-AI collaboration. Its Visual Agent Builder provides a drag-and-drop interface for creating and modifying agents, while multi-model composition covers GPT, Claude, Gemini, and more. The Knowledge Store is described as a place to access and search code and data, with GitHub vector store integration supported. Giselle targets GitHub operations, code review, research, document generation, and chained business workflows; it is available as a self-hosted application and a hosted cloud service.

Users create and modify agents through the drag-and-drop Visual Agent Builder, then compose workflows that can use GPT, Claude, Gemini, and other models. The Knowledge Store accesses and searches code and data, and the README explicitly notes GitHub vector store integration. For GitHub operations, Giselle is described as automating issues, PRs, and deployments with AI. Listed outputs include code-review work, PRDs, specifications, and release notes. For local use, install dependencies with pnpm install, place at least one provider API key in .env.local, run pnpm turbo dev, and open http://localhost:3000.

  1. An engineering team that wants AI automation around GitHub issues, pull requests, or deployments.
  2. A product or development user who needs to assemble a multi-model workflow visually instead of starting with hand-written orchestration.
  3. A team that needs AI to search its code and data, including a supported GitHub vector store integration.
  4. A product-delivery team generating PRDs, specifications, or release notes from its codebase.
  5. An internal automation user chaining several models for a more complex business process.

How do you install or deploy this agent?

Run: git clone https://github.com/giselles-ai/giselle.git && cd giselle && pnpm install. Create .env.local and add at least one provider key, for example OPENAI_API_KEY="your_openai_api_key_here". The README also lists Anthropic and Google AI as supported providers. Start the application with pnpm turbo dev.

How do you use this agent?

After pnpm turbo dev starts, open http://localhost:3000 and begin building AI agents with the drag-and-drop Visual Agent Builder. Configure at least one OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google AI API key in .env.local before starting the application. The documented workflow can compose GPT, Claude, Gemini, and other models, while the Knowledge Store is described for accessing and searching code and data. The supplied README does not document detailed workflow publishing, GitHub authorization, or production deployment commands.

What are this agent's strengths and limitations?

Pros
  • It explicitly supports composing GPT, Claude, and Gemini in the same workflow.
  • The drag-and-drop Visual Agent Builder gives users a visual way to create and modify agents.
  • Its Knowledge Store is intended for code and data search, with GitHub vector store integration called out directly.
  • The repository identifies concrete engineering uses: GitHub issue, PR, and deployment automation; code review; and delivery-document generation.
Limitations
  • Self-hosting requires at least one API key from OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google AI, creating an external provider dependency.
  • The public roadmap is still being created, and Team Collaboration and Template Hub are marked In Development.
  • The README does not specify the permissions, token setup, or authorization flow for GitHub operations.
  • No concrete documentation is supplied for production deployment, model-routing behavior, workflow observability, or failure handling.

How does this agent compare with similar options?

Key facts side by side with the most closely related agents.

Agent Source review Form / cost Stars Updated Language Full support on
Giselle This agent 43 · Major gaps Self-hosted serviceFreemium ★ 559 3d ago TypeScript OpenAI API · Claude API
Webwright Browser Coding Agent 66 · Some gaps CLIFree + model costs ★ 6.1k 10d ago Python Codex · Claude Code · OpenAI API · Claude API
ReadmeAI - AI-Powered README Generator 51 · Major gaps CLIFree + model costs ★ 3k 2mo ago Python OpenAI API · Claude API
Stripe AI 50 · Major gaps Library / SDKFree + model costs ★ 2k 1d ago TypeScript Codex · Claude Code · OpenAI API · Claude API

How does FollowAgents rate this agent?

FollowAgents source review · FARS-2.1
Major gaps
43/ 100 5-point scale 2.2 / 5
Trust 7/29
Reliability 8/14
Adaptability 8/18
Convention 10/18
Effectiveness 7/13
Verifiability 3/8
Why each dimension lost points
Trust7 / 29 · 1.2/5

Evidence shows: CI workflow uses least privilege (contents: read), dependency overrides show attention to dependency security, SECURITY.md provides reporting channels. Deductions: no user confirmation mechanism, data flow transparency, sensitive data handling details, rollback mechanism; external effects (e.g., GitHub operations) not detailed; publisher identity unverified, source attribution only based on repository metadata.

Reliability8 / 14 · 2.9/5

Evidence shows: consistent project structure, uses turbo and pnpm, CI includes tests and type checks, dependency overrides ensure availability. Deductions: failure messages not explicit in docs, error handling details insufficient.

Adaptability8 / 18 · 2.2/5

Evidence shows: README clearly identifies target users (developers and non-engineers), provides multiple use cases and self-hosting guide, environment requirements (Node >=24) explicit. Deductions: capability boundaries not clear, trigger precision (e.g., specific triggers for GitHub operations) not specified.

Convention10 / 18 · 2.8/5

Evidence shows: README structure clear, installation steps detailed, license Apache-2.0, contribution guide and security policy present. Deductions: version only 0.1.0, no changelog file, known limitations not explicitly listed.

Effectiveness7 / 13 · 2.7/5

Evidence shows: output usability high (cloud service and self-hosting), marginal value evident (automating workflows), cost-benefit not detailed (free tier and open source). Deductions: cost-benefit analysis insufficient.

Verifiability3 / 8 · 1.9/5

Evidence shows: feature claims in README have some support (e.g., GitHub integration), but lack detailed documentation or test evidence. Deductions: claim-evidence correspondence incomplete, cross-source verification limited, facts and inferences not clearly separated.

Risks and how to mitigate them
  • Not found in source: confirmation before actingTurn on (or add) a confirmation step before it acts, and try it in a sandbox or test environment before real data.
  • Not found in source: data-flow disclosureWatch which external services it contacts (proxy or firewall logs) and keep sensitive data out until you know where it goes.
  • Not found in source: rollback or recovery pathBack up first, or work on a git branch or snapshot, so its changes can be undone.
  • Publisher identity unverified; treat source with caution.
  • No user confirmation mechanism found; may execute external actions automatically.
  • Sensitive data handling details not disclosed; review yourself.
  • Version 0.1.0 indicates early development; API may be unstable.
Evidence confidence: Low Reviewed Aug 09, 2026 Reviewed revision 56ff5f1c86b4 New commits since this review; the score may not cover them
See the full review method →

Recent releases

Latest entries from the project's GitHub Releases. Notes are quoted from upstream as written, not rewritten or tested by FollowAgents.

  1. v0.75.6
    Release notes excerpt
    What's Changed Maintenance - chore: remove Google URL Context feature (#2880) @shige - chore: drop stale WAITUNTIL_OFFSET_MILLIS passthrough (#2882) @shige Full Changelog: https://github.com/giselles-ai/giselle/compare/v0.75.5...v0.75.6 Originally released: 2026-04-21
    View on GitHub ↗
  2. v0.75.5
    Release notes excerpt
    What's Changed Dependencies - fix(deps): bump protobufjs from 7.4.0 to 7.5.5 (#2877) @shige Full Changelog: https://github.com/giselles-ai/giselle/compare/v0.75.4...v0.75.5 Originally released: 2026-04-17
    View on GitHub ↗
  3. v0.75.4
    Release notes excerpt
    What's Changed Maintenance - chore: clean up unused pnpm catalog entries and remove knip catalog exclusion (#2851) @legasik21 Bug Fixes - fix(ci): add explicit permissions to GitHub Actions workflows (#2875) @shige Dependencies - fix(deps): bump happy-dom from 20.0.2 to 20.8.8 (#2862) @shige - fix(deps): bump next from 16.1.7 to 16.2.3 (#2864) @shige - fix(deps): bump @trigger.dev/sdk and CLI from 4.3.0 to 4.4.4 (#2865) @shige - fix(deps): bump vite from 7.3.1 to 7.3.2 (#2866) @shige - fix(deps): bump systeminformation from 5.23.8 to 5.31.5 (#2867) @shige …
    View on GitHub ↗

FAQ

Can I self-host Giselle?
Yes. The documented local flow installs dependencies, configures a provider key in .env.local, and starts the app with pnpm turbo dev.
Which model providers are supported?
The README lists OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google AI, and describes composition across GPT, Claude, and Gemini.
Is the cloud service free?
The README states that the cloud free plan includes 30 minutes of Agent time per month. It provides no further pricing detail.
What GitHub permissions are required?
Giselle is described as automating issues, PRs, and deployments, but the supplied documentation does not specify required scopes, token types, or authorization setup.
Are collaboration and templates ready now?
The README labels Team Collaboration and Template Hub as In Development.
View on GitHub ↗ Install ↓

Compare agents like this one

The same FARS review applied across the shortlist this agent qualifies for.

Related agents