Simple OTP

The description states that Simple OTP is:

• A private, local-first macOS menu bar app with a CLI companion
• Built using SwiftUI and AppKit
• Uses Google OAuth for read-only access to Gmail accounts
• Detects new verification emails and extracts one-time codes
• Surfaces the code in the menu bar or next to OTP input fields via Apple’s Accessibility API
• Stores OAuth tokens in the macOS Keychain
• Synchronizes Gmail using history cursors, claims messages once, and persists deduplication state in SQLite
• Uses a shared SimpleOTPCore package for both app and CLI
• Handles various code formats (numeric, grouped, alphanumeric, Unicode, HTML, localized) while rejecting irrelevant identifiers

Evidence strength This is all self-reported by the author. No third-party verification or independent evidence of functionality.

The author claims:

• Verification codes should feel instant but currently involve a multi-step process
• The app removes friction without forwarding mail to a third-party service
• It is designed for users who use multiple Gmail accounts or browsers outside Apple’s ecosystem

Inference This suggests the product is positioned as a productivity tool for developers or power users, not a commercial SaaS offering.

Evidence strength Claims are self-reported and lack traction or market validation data.

The description states:

• The app targets users who use multiple Gmail accounts
• Users who use browsers outside Apple’s ecosystem
• The author personally uses it every day

Inference The ICP appears to be technical users, possibly developers or power users, who are frustrated by the current OTP experience.

Evidence strength Only personal usage is stated. No evidence of a broader customer base or market segmentation.

The description states:

• The app is a menu bar app with CLI companion
• It is built as a personal tool, not a commercial product
• No pricing, subscription model, or monetization strategy is mentioned

Inference It appears to be a free, personal utility app, possibly open-source or freemium.

Evidence strength No evidence of any business model or pricing structure.

The description states:

• Built with SwiftUI and AppKit
• Uses OAuth 2.0 for Gmail access
• Stores tokens in macOS Keychain
• Synchronizes using history cursors, claims messages once, deduplicates with SQLite
• Extraction pipeline handles multiple formats and rejects irrelevant identifiers
• Uses Apple’s Accessibility API to detect OTP fields
• A shared SimpleOTPCore package powers both app and CLI
• Built with Codex and GPT-5.6

Inference The technical stack is solid for a macOS-native tool, and the architecture shows attention to security (local-first, Keychain), deduplication, and code extraction.

Evidence strength All technical claims are self-reported and unverified.

The description states:

• The author built it as their second public app
• It was submitted to the OpenAI 2026 hackathon
• The author personally uses it every day
• It is a personal tool, not a commercial product

Inference There is no evidence of user adoption, revenue, or customer traction beyond personal use.

Evidence strength No data on downloads, usage metrics, or market response.

The description states:

• The app solves a problem with verification codes in browsers outside Apple’s ecosystem
• It avoids forwarding mail to third-party services

Inference It may compete with browser extensions or tools that automate OTP handling, but no specific competitors are named.

Evidence strength No mention of existing tools or competitive landscape.

• No commercial traction or revenue: The app is described as personal use only.
• No evidence of user adoption beyond the author
• No pricing or monetization strategy
• No third-party verification or independent testing
• No mention of scalability or long-term maintenance plans
• No evidence of a broader product roadmap or team

Inference This is a personal project, not a commercial venture. It may be a prototype or proof-of-concept.

1. What is the actual user base beyond your own use?
2. Are you planning to monetize this tool, and if so, how?
3. Have you considered expanding support for other email providers or messaging platforms?
4. How do you plan to maintain or scale the code extraction logic as formats evolve?
5. Is there any intention to open-source or release this beyond personal use?