Evaluate completed work beyond the answer
An agent combines interpretation, tools and execution steps to pursue a task. In business processes, the relevant test is whether it reaches an authorized outcome, preserves evidence and routes what it cannot resolve. A polished answer or isolated demonstration does not establish that capability in your operation.
Use a concrete case: checking an inventory discrepancy, preparing engineering documents or following up a delivery incident. Define available data, permitted actions, owner and closure condition. This description allows comparison without equating feature count with fit for the job.
Manus: examine task lifecycle and integrations
The official Manus API v2 introduction describes creating and managing agent tasks, follow-up messages, projects, files, skills and webhooks for completion or required input. The comparison should therefore account for an API that integrates tasks into applications and workflows.
In your pilot, confirm how a task receives ERP context, how new information changes execution and how results return to the system. Request evidence for permissions, retention, support and commercial conditions applicable to the proposal. This analysis uses the consulted public documentation; it is not an independent test or a complete inventory of Manus plans.
OpenClaw: examine the trust boundary and operations
OpenClaw security documentation describes one trust boundary per gateway for an operator or mutually trusting team. It recommends separating gateways and credentials for mixed-trust scenarios and provides guidance on auditing, permissions, isolation and network exposure. Evaluate deployment design rather than assuming that an absence of managed service means an absence of controls.
For an operation maintained by your team, assign owners for updates, backups, incidents, secrets and recovery. Verify required isolation between departments, customers and contractors in the actual scenario. The choice depends on the ability to operate that architecture and contracted support, not simply on starting the agent.
Zild: connect the agent to the business process
Zild’s proposition is to integrate processes, people, tools and agents to reduce the cost of getting work done. Admin organizes agents, access and connectors; Chat provides user access; Flow tracks tasks and owners. The design can connect ERP, documents and channels according to available integrations and deployed scope.
For SMB plans, Zild manages the platform and the subscription reflects company size; customers configure credentials and pay provider usage separately. Enterprise is quoted individually, with enterprise support and dedicated database and deployment options, customer infrastructure or a separate Zild-managed environment. Confirm region, architecture, responsibilities and terms in the proposal. This positioning does not establish superior performance.
Compare the same evidence across alternatives
Request a demonstration with synthetic data representing a real exception. Check who can read, who can write, what requires approval and how execution stops. Ask for a record linking input, tool, decision and outcome. A declared control list does not replace testing with different identities.
Also examine maintenance work: what happens when the ERP changes, a credential expires or a model changes? Record demonstrated items, items needing implementation and unresolved evidence gaps. Do not label a capability absent simply because it was not in the pages consulted.
Use a benchmark of your process
Prepare cases for success, missing data, conflicting information, denied permission, unavailable tools and repeated events. Keep scope, data and evaluation criteria consistent. Each solution may use its recommended architecture, but configuration, effort and cost differences must be recorded.
Measure correct completions, inappropriate actions, human review, latency and cost per resolved case. Separate integration failures, interpretation errors and missing data. For engineering, validate revision and units; for logistics, event order and freshness; for inventory and finance, record confirmation and duplication. This guide presents no measured results comparing the three products.
Calculate operating and switching costs
Compare subscription or licensing, models, infrastructure, integrations, review, support and maintenance. Include implementation, training, coexistence and failure recovery. Low license costs can coexist with greater operational effort; a managed proposal must also demonstrate what it includes. Use prices from the offer being considered rather than mixing plans within the same scenario.
Combine process fit, quality, demonstrated controls and total cost in the decision. Bring Zild one priority case and the criteria used to evaluate alternatives. A pilot should demonstrate the path from identifying an exception to completing work with the right owners before expanding adoption.
Official documentation consulted
- Manus API v2 — Introduction Checked on
- OpenClaw — Gateway security Checked on
Turn this guide into a testable pilot
Gather this information to scope the work with Zild. During the conversation, we assess integrations, owners and how to measure outcomes.
- A case with expected input and output
- Available systems, access and test environment
- Failure cases and acceptance criteria
Describe the process in the form; samples and documents can be prepared later without confidential data.
The form opens with this guide’s title. You can edit everything before sending.