I tested 4 AI agents on 9 real tasks. Here’s who won.

Vídeo em Inglês, publicado pelo canal How I AI.

About this content: The summary, key points and topics below are generated automatically from the video transcript. They reflect the content, opinions, claims and predictions presented in the video and do not represent a position, validation or fact-check by IA Dots.

Video summary

The video presents an evaluation comparing four AI personal agents (Dot, Grok, Muse, and Claude Duet) across nine different tasks. The host details the setup, the tools used to run the benchmark, and the specific results for each task. Finally, the host reviews the overall performance, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each agent in work and personal scenarios.

Key points

• The benchmark tests four different AI personal agents across nine tasks, including drafting replies, cutting short-form videos, fixing bugs, and personal shopping.
• Grok bot completed all tasks and won the overall benchmark, scoring highest in areas like Figma-based thumbnails, to-do list interfaces, and price comparison shopping.
• Muse excelled in personal and creative tasks such as short-form video editing, family newspapers, and quick homework explanations, despite lacking initial business integrations like GitHub or Slack.
• Dot and Claude Duet performed well in coding and technical workflows, but struggled with creative outputs and user interface formatting.
• Claude Duet was observed to be the slowest agent and requested the most permissions, indicating a more cautious safety posture.
• The host concludes that Grok is preferred for work tasks, Muse for personal life tasks, while underlying models from OpenAI and Anthropic remain favored specifically for coding.

Topics

AI personal agentsBenchmark testingGrok botMuse agentClaude DuetTask automationEnterprise securityProductivity tools

Video transcript

Transcript from available captions; it may contain errors.

I told you all I have personal agent fatigue, but I am here for you. So, today I am going into the personal agent minds and I am running the very first how I AI personal agent benchmark, which goes across four agents and nine tasks to tell you what personal agent is actually the best. I am going to try to run this in the most unbiased equal way. I will tell you how I set up the benchmark, what is in the benchmark, how I ran the benchmark, and then we're going to look at the results, and at the very end get a summary of what agent I think does best on which task. This was a really fun and also hard one to run. I spent definitely several hours today figuring out how to run this and getting it done. I hope that you all find this helpful, and I am going to be along the ride with you because I really haven't looked at many of these results, and so we're going to look at them live. We're going to see how it goes, and I'm going to tell you which personal agent is the best for you. This episode is brought to you by WorkOS. [music] AI has already changed how we work. Tools are helping teams write better code, analyze customer data, and even handle support tickets automatically [music]. But there's a catch. These tools only work well when they have deep [music] access to company systems. Your co-pilot needs to see your entire code base. Your chatbot needs to search across [music] internal docs. And for enterprise buyers, that raises serious security concerns. That's why these apps face intense IT scrutiny from day one. To pass, they need secure authentication, access controls, audit logs, the whole suite of enterprise [music] features. Building all that from scratch, it's a massive lift. That's where WorkOS comes in. WorkOS gives you drop-in [music] APIs for enterprise features, so your app can become enterprise ready and scale upmarket faster. Think of it like Stripe for enterprise features [music]. OpenAI, Perplexity, and Cursor are already using WorkOS to move faster and meet enterprise demands. [music] Join them and hundreds of other industry leaders at workos.com. Start building today. Okay, before I go into the results of the benchmark, I just want to tell you how I came up with this bench. So, the first thing I did is I went into all my agents, I went into dot, grokbot, news, and duet, Claude's duet, and I said, "I'm going to run a benchmark. Give me like the top tasks that you do for me." And so, each of them gave me their top 10 tasks, and then I put them all into Claude, and I said, "Okay, come up with a way to run a personal benchmark against this picking the tasks that were most common across the agents because, to be honest, I use different agents for different things, and so I wanted to find sort of the most cross-cutting use cases as well as use cases that would test different components. And then, the way I was going to run this is I was going to have one operator agent, which was going to use computer use to run all the other agents, um and then keep the benchmark going and and so on and so forth. The one problem with my operator agent plan was I also needed to run dot, and Codex is my favorite computer use agent. So, just to be very clear, I had Claude run dot, and then I had Codex run Claude, grokbot, and news. So, there's like a little bit of diff in the operator agent, but I thought this was pretty clever. The other thing that I wanted to make sure was that all of my agents had access to the same things, and this was a really good tip for you all that are suffering like me where you have all these agents, and they all have access to like a couple different email addresses, a couple different connectors. Like, one's connected here, one isn't connected there. So, one tip I have for you all is I had Codex use browser use to check that all my agents were connected to roughly the same stuff and had access to the same skills. So, just to set the baseline, we picked a couple of tasks across the top ones for my agents. I used Codex to make sure they all had access to the same things, although I forgot one of my agents, Muse, and that they all had access to the same skills. So, they were like as baselined as humanly possible, although of course they all benefit from memory and all the different things that are in each of those agents. So, then I had this even kind of like plan. And then what I did is I had eight, actually nine, use cases that I was going to test each of these agents against and created very specific lightweight prompts for each of these. I didn't want it to do that like sort of AI prompting where it does like a paragraph for you. I was like,"Keep it in my voice. Do exactly what I would do."And so, I plan, there's actually nine here. I'll I'll walk you through them, run sheet of tasks with the prompt, um if an agent asks for something, what you should say, and um how you can nudge it. And so, the tasks that I came up with were drafting a reply um in Slack to my friend at lovable that asked me for something this morning, um cutting a short-form video, fixing a bug from Century, um building a how-to AI thumbnail, triaging my inbox for to-dos, building a family newspaper, explaining a physics um question answer to me because I'm going to explain it to my fourth grader, going shopping for shoes, and then making a trap PRD launch video. So, those were the tasks. And then, as I said, I had Claude computer use run dot, and then I had Codex run computer use against Claude Duet, Grok Bot, and Muse, and then I had it run and time all the things and do all the results. Before we get into the full results, just a couple observations. One is man, I'm now going to have computer use run all my agents running other agents. Like the parallel-ism of this exercise was thrilling to the heart. Um two, I did forget to hook up Muse to a bunch of business tools. I just don't use Muse for business stuff. And one of the things I I noticed is as I was like the bench was running, I was like,"Oh, I forgot to hook up Slack." Slack isn't in the con-connector list. And so it was just kind of annoying. So it's very clear that Muse is sort of like the one off the side. That's not really meant for business necessarily. It's really more of a personal agent. Um and then Claude computer use is just hot garbage. Um so I was like super frustrated having Claude computer use, but I needed something other than Codex to run Codex. And so we get what we get and we don't get upset, but I did not love Claude computer use. So let's dive into the results. I'm actually recording um my audio right now. So as I talk through the results and tell you what I think, we're going to put that into Claude at the very end. It's going to score all these things and come up with which one I like the best. So this sort of live human in the loop scoring that I'm going to go through all these, tell you what I think, and we can see if you agree as well. So let's go for it. All right. So this is how I personal benchmark dot, Grok, Muse, and Claude. Call out here, Muse and Claude could only get seven of the nine tasks done. Um we will see if that was human error or agent error, but dot and Grok completed all the tasks. Okay. So how we ran it again, the prompts were just one line. They they very human-driven. They weren't those like big um AI prompts. The agent did not drive itself, so the agent was driven by an operator agent. I had to like babysit things, so I did nudge things, computer use broke, all that kind of stuff. So, I was kind of in the loop, so we did a little zigzag, and then actually judge blind is fake. I am judging it not blind. I'm going to judge it live on this episode, and you all are going to come along with me on my judging journey. Okay, here's the entry scoreboard, and then we'll do the final score at the end. Just a couple things to see right off the bat. Muse is very fast. Muse was the fastest in four out of the nine tasks, even though it had to be steered the most. Um Grok and Dot also had a couple tasks where they finished very fast, and then Claude was overall and in incremental tasks the slowest. I called this out in my recent Claude duet um review, just super slow, so I like forgot what it was doing, kind of frustrating. And then you can see here, this is really funny. Claude asked for the most permissions, like Claude was the most timid, so you can see it asked four times for permission, where all the other ones only asked once. So, very interesting kind of meta view on safety and and stuff like that here with Claude. So, let's look at minutes per task. So, you can see Dot and Claude are generally the slowest, and then Muse is consistently the fastest. Um Muse was the fastest on building a thumbnail, going through my inbox, building a family newspaper, and building a launch video. Grok was fastest at drafting a reply as me and fixing a bug. Interestingly enough, it was the fastest at coding. And then Codex was the fastest at making a video and actually shopping for shoes for me, though we'll see how um good of a job that it did. Dot was also the slowest on a lot of tasks, and then Claude, for whatever reason, was very slow on replying to his email. So, you know, this impression that I had in my Muse review where I said Muse is very fast, actually held up in this experiment. And then my impression that Claude was very slow also held up in the experiment. So, while you all may think that my reviews are not scientific, they are in fact backed up by this very tremendously accurate data science. Okay, so let's go through the tasks. So, the first one was replying to me. It was replying to a Slack. It was replying to a Slack to my friend at Lovable who asked me to do a talk. So, I will say all of these were fine. Muse couldn't do it because it didn't have access to Slack, again, because I don't really hook it up to Slack. It's just not what I'm using it for. All of them were great. All of them said,"Yes, I will do this event."But I did like Dot in particular because it asked for me to be paid, and it asked if it was remote. And if you don't know me, I like to be paid to do things, and I like to not leave my house. So, it did feel like ChatGPT Codex Dot knew me the best and knew about the things that I cared about. My schedule is busy. I need to get paid if I'm using my time, all this kind of stuff. I promise, Lovable, I'll do it for you. I'm happy to do it. But it was pretty interesting to see Dot was the only one that did it. All the other ones were fine. I would call this, you know, Claude is the shortest, but actually did the most inaccurate response. So, if I'm just eyeballing this, Muse didn't do it. Claude did short, but okay. I would say Grok is most in my voice, and Dot did the most accurate job. So again, I think any of these tools is fine. They all did fine. This is not a very hard task. Okay. Now, here's the fun one. I had um these agents make videos for our Monday episode with Blair from Reddit. And so, it actually all it did was go into my Dropbox, find the raw video, pull it down, cut it, and make a video. Claude could not do it. Duet could not do it. It would not download a video. So, Claude totally face-planted on this one. Um it gets a big fat donut um on on Claude Duet for video editing, but Dot, Grok, and Muse did them. And we're just going to go ahead, why not? Let's watch a little of them live. >> not listening, what is your prompting strategy? How do you get it back on track? >> I don't yell at them. I know some folks do. But what I do is I take a day, and then I get more vague. And we all have bots with projects >> projects and con-Okay, that was Dot. >> what is your prompting strategy? How do you get it back on track? >> So, I don't yell at them. I know some folks do. Uh but what I do is I take a day, and then I get >> Uh that was Grok. Grok has bad overlays, but it did the like zoomy in, zoomy out videos better. Let's look at Muse real quick. >> your prompting strategy? How do you get it back on track? >> I don't yell at them. I know some folks do. But what I do is I take a day, and then I get more vague. And we all have bots with projects and context, and I pop out of a project, and I describe the thing large, like a movie director. So, here are all the facts, and then here is all the intents, and then I pull that back into the project, and then it knows enough to apply it to what our goals are. >> Okay, so this is what I will say. Very, very hot takes. Again, Claude didn't do it. These are all like kind of impressive in that I didn't touch them. The The design of the one that I like the most is Muse. So, Muse is very simple. It's got the How I tag in the front, the um the caption layout is ours. There's no funky stuff. The cuts are punchy. They don't do the zoom in zoom out, but it's okay. The design of Grok is terrible. Um and it's got this like overlay on his forehead, which is very unattractive, but it did that zoom in zoom out. And then I would say dot looks very good. It looks just like the Muse one, but it again just doesn't have those punchy cuts. So, I want to give it to Muse. I'm giving it to Muse. I think Muse would do the best. And then I think, you know, Claude failed, Grok probably the worst, and dot second choice. So, again, I didn't really give it much to work with. I gave it access to the transcript, a raw video. I didn't touch it and all of these cut. I think with a better skill, it could have done a better job, but I was actually really surprised by Muse because I have not had Muse do this task before, and it really nailed it out the gate. So, I don't know if you all know this, but I've been using Muse a lot for social, specifically posting social, but I may start to think about Muse for creating these social posts as well, because it did quite a nice job. The other thing to call out is Grok did the worst and took the longest. So, again, I don't think it's really optimized for this video cutting use case. And then dot was it it can't tell how long it did. I think it took about 7 minutes. Was good, not great at this short. Okay, the next one was fixing a bug. So, classic coding use case. Again, another one that had one of these agents fail. Muse did not do it. I don't have GitHub access to Muse. I don't have actually have any business system access in Muse. Um so, Muse did nothing. I asked it to maybe assign it to Devin in linear, and it thought Devin was a person. Devin is not a person. Devin's an agent. So, Muse fell off the board. But let's look at the other ones. They all took about 10 minutes to get this done. And I actually had Claude Opus 55 go grade the fixes, and we'll just look at them right here. So, dot Codex got closest to the actual fix. So, that one did um the fix that we thought was the most accurate for the bug. Claude Duet, though, found a second bug that we didn't find, which we really, really love. Grok did the worst job, which is at loosen validation. So, it was just like,"We're going to solve the bug by not validating this bad issue."And then Muse didn't do it. So, I'm actually going to give Claude and dot the wins here. I'm going to give Claude the extra thumbs up because not only did Claude find another bug and fix it, it also identified that dot had already fixed it and said,"I don't need to ship any more code."So, I would say for coding, Codex and Claude or dot and Duet are truly kind of the best. I actually don't code that much with Grok, so I'm not surprised that this wasn't as good. I really only do my coding in Claude and Codex. Um so, I'm not surprised these worked, but I was surprised at how bad the coding from Grok was. So, kind of my instinct was right on these. Open AI Anthropic much better at coding than Grok Bot, although Grok Bot's good at a lot of stuff. This episode is brought to you by Firecrawl, which gives your AI agents data from the [music] web and beyond. Your agents can search and scrape the web while accessing Alexandria's rapidly expanding library of over 100 million indexed sources [music] and more than 200 data providers, all through one connection. Connect Firecrawl [music] to ChatGPT or Claude to find people and their work emails. Pick your fantasy football lineup or analyze trends for your next marketing campaign. Firecrawl is building the library for super intelligence, bringing more of the world's knowledge into the tools you already use. Go to firecrawl.dev/howiai to get started. Okay, next one. Let's look at episode thumbnails. So, we did episode clips. Now, we'll do episode thumbnails. And I will say um we did the pre-work here. So, our thumbnail templates are actually like quite lovely. Um so, it's actually pretty easy to use um the thing that MCP and create new thumbnails. So, I'm just going to do a hot judgment here. Muse did the worst job. Muse pulled our existing thumbnail and then did this really ugly one where he's like Blair is like peeking through creepy curtains. We hate this. I'm sorry, Blair. I would never do this to you. Um and so, Muse is going to fail here. No good. Um Grok though, Dot, and Claude did perfectly fine jobs. Although, I will say Dot and Claude just put new content in existing templates that we had. So, didn't really get super creative. I would say Grok actually wins this one in that it gave me really good new ideas for these thumbnails and headlines, ones that we hadn't done that I also think look really nice. Actually, maybe we should test these while they're live. They have like that YouTube vibe to them. And so, this is like a fun tip for you all is I have consistently tested Grok, Dot, and Claude duet on Figma. And Grok is definitely the best at Figma. Grok is like 100%the best at using Figma. I don't know if this is John at Space X X Eyes like Figma bro magic touch, but if you're using Figma, use Grok Bot, man. It is so good. So, that is my preference. I'm not surprised it's won. Grok takes the cake for Figma, and maybe I will have it create the thumbnails for this episode. Okay, something that might not be obvious from the high-level benchmark that I want to call out about how all these agents did things is they all have different interfaces for giving you to-dos. And so, while they all found the to-dos fine, I suppose, and they all gave me reasonable things to focus on, I'm going to say that Grok did the best job because it gave me a Grok document. And these just came out, I think, last week. And they're so nice. It's just this like beautiful list of things that I need to look at with little check marks, super organized, really nice to work with. And so, you know, all of them did a fine job finding the tasks. I would just say Grok gave those tasks to me in the best format. Muse only had access to my Gmail, but found all the things I need to do as a parent ahead of Halloween week, which is a busy week for parents. And then Claude wanted to put my to-dos in its little like task follow-up list so I could track them. Dot did the worst job here, for sure. It just gave me a message with like five things I should focus on. So, Dot gets the thumb down for me on like the personal agent personal agent. I would rank these as Grok best interface, best job. This is what I use Grok Bot for. My chief of staff is in Grok Bot. I'm not surprised that it does a really good job there. Muse did a perfectly lovely job with information it had. Claude was fine, but again, I just don't like that I have to be in the Claude app for this. And Dot really, really failed here. Okay, family newspaper. Um so this was a really interesting one. This is a use case if you've used my Grok bot trad bot that I really like where we print out a newspaper in the morning for the kids to look at about what's going on for the week, what's um what our schedule's like, what events, what news would be interesting. Claude did such a trash job that I feel like I should actually call it out. It made like a markdown file. It made me so so so sad and Claude only had access to my work calendar and so it was just like, I can't do anything. I made you an outline. And I had this experience a couple times with Duet where like it couldn't do the job and then just gave me like a markdown file that was like, this is how you can do the job. This is not what I want at all. So Claude definitely failed the family newspaper test. Um but Dot, Grok, and Muse all did different jobs and I was shocked, sadly shocked how poorly Dot did. Like look at this design. It is trash trash. And again, these are not my children's names. I just like had it swap out um different kids'names but this is so ugly. Like what model thinks that this is a good idea? This is terrible. Grok did a really nice job. I actually run mine consistently through Grok, so you can see here it's got big week at school. It's got a don't forget list. There's Bay Area sports. There's Halloween stuff. There's nice uh weather across the top. But Muse, per my earlier review, just absolutely crushed the family newspaper. It generated this nice little image and I do have three boys and they're adorable like this and so it has this beautiful image at the top, a headline. It did take two pages, but I'm okay with it if it's really cute and it has our schedule on one page and then a cute day-by-day weather ideas, inspiration on the second page. I just think it's really cute. I think if I tuned it with a skill, it would do an excellent job. So, if you're looking for family newspaper, yes, I love Trad Bot. Please download it for your Grok Bot, but maybe you tell your Muse to do it because it does a really nice job with family-oriented artifacts. Okay, um one kind of like side task I had these agents do, which I occasionally do on the go, is take a screenshot or take a picture of my kids' advanced homework, which I have forgotten how to do, and ask it,"How do I explain this to my kids?"So, I haven't done physics in a long time. Like, how do I explain a velocity over time graph to my kid? Now, I do know how to do this, but we just used it as a good example. I just open up the workbook. Okay, so I picked this like ex-explain this little exercise, um and asked them all to complete it. They all got it right. The answer is C. They all explained it fine. Who won though? Muse won. Why did Muse win? It took approximately a half a sec-second to get this right. And so, this was one where like the information was correct across the board. Muse was so lightning fast, and we didn't record it here because it was so fast. Um it was so fast and gave me the answer, and so, I've actually been moving a lot of my chat GPT-like Googley question and answer-style chats to Muse because it does such a good job and it's so fast. So, like, sort of my go-to like explain how this works, what is this, look this up, I've been moving those a lot to Muse again because of this experiment where it's really, really fast. Okay, another personal use case. I did here um shopping for some autumn shoes. I don't know what's going to make me cool. I'm an old lady, but I want those like red Adidas Tokyos. I hear that a slim shoe is really in right now, but I'm cheap. So, I want to find a good deal. So, I asked Grok, Dot, Muse, and Claude to do this. Claude totally got blocked by almost every shopping site. I don't know why. It was like consistently blocked. Over time, it also looked for white shoes with red stripes instead of red shoes with white stripes. Like I don't know why it did it, and it found the most expensive ones. And so, like Claude really failed this personal shopping task. Grok found great ones. So, Grok did a really, really good job, as did Muse. Although, Muse needed a little bit of steering. So, Grok was super fast and did a good job. I have Grok do a lot of this like price comparison shopping for me. And this has been my experience where it's like really good at using navigation, shopping, and price compare. Dot did not do a good job here, either. So, while Claude did like a bad job, Dot like barely tried. Dot did not do comparison. It didn't look at different colors. It didn't like say like,"I can't find red, but I can find maroon."So, I would rank this as Grok best, Muse almost as good, Claude not good, but at least it tried, and Dot did not try at all. So, if you're using shopping, I would say Grok and Muse are your buddies. Okay, here's the last one. I'm already laughing because I can tell one of these are two wearables. So, the last one a launch video for a chap purity feature called product intelligence that I'm working on and launching. And you can just see here they just really went lots of different directions. Now, I have a skill for this and so it should be able to follow the skill and do what it's supposed to do, but we're just going to look at the differences between these. We're going to start with dot which is not good. It's like a PowerPoint um as it's no no no no no good. [music] I mean this is very soothing, but this is terrible. Okay, so no fail. I hate you dot bad video. No good. Kind of like the newspaper. It's like what are you what are we even doing here? Grok crushed though. Look at this. Um now it it it actually used my skill. So, where Oh, there's like a little error here so that the layout isn't perfect, but at least used my skill and looks like our video's looking, but the layout isn't very good at all um and there's a lot of overflow so better but not great. Muse ate it. Um Muse doesn't have access to my repo so I did not set up our sweet Muse account. >> Repo product decision has a paper trail. It is just scattered. Think locally link shows what how confident together. Events first inference save. >> Hold on. I'm pa-I'm pausing because although it hadn't access to nothing. It made up a bunch of stuff. Um and gave a nice little uh British accent overview. >> Uncertainty out in the open. >> Ooh. Um so, I would say it's bad um but bad in an ambitious way. So, I'm going to give Muse a couple extra points for effort. A couple points for effort. And then Claude I don't know. This is why I use Claude to do this. Claude did a very very good job and the most important >> are telling you exactly what to build. It's just scattered across support chats, call notes, bug reports, issues, and pull requests. Meet product intelligence from Chat PRD. Connect the tools where customers talk and your team ships. >> So, what I will say is like Claude nailed the value prop, it used our branding, there were no layout issues. It actually when asked and used the 11 Labs MCP to come up with a voiceover, I would have loved for it to be a female voice or even my voice that I have recorded in 11 Labs. But, Claude absolutely crushed [snorts] this task. Duet crushed this task. And so, what I would say is Claude for video. Claude for video, Jen. It's just it's just the best. Maybe not funny TikTok style vertical video, but like these product walkthroughs, those sorts of things. I actually didn't think Claude Duet would do a good job and it did a really good job. Um Muse was terrible, but like terrible because of me. Dot was terrible because of Dot. And Grok tried. Like Grok followed instructions, so I can't give it a hard time. So, that is the final kind of like my analysis. Let me pause, I'm going to throw this transcript into Claude and we're going to get the final ranking and scoring. All right, party people. Here we go. Here are the results of the very first How I AI personal agent benchmark and Grok won. Grokbot Grokbot's the best. And we love her. She is the best, so A+ SpaceX SI team, you cooked. The potato cooked. Grokbot is freaking awesome. So, Grok Bot got 93%uh done, high-quality fixes. I don't actually know how these scores work, but Claude told me it's true. It won three tasks, including doing my thumbnail, doing a to-do list for my inbox, and shopping for shoes for me. So, that just shows the breadth of the Grok Bot, but as predicted, and this is why I tell people I use these two agents, Muse coming up with all the personal use cases. We gave Muse a break on the tasks that it couldn't do because I didn't give it GitHub, and I don't give it access to work stuff, so it can't do those tasks. But, on the tasks that it had access for, it crushed, especially creative ones. The short-form content, it did the best. Family newspaper did the best. It's super fast at explaining homework. It is my personal agent. I'm not surprised to see it up here. Dot coming right up behind. I think Dot got kind of like a little sandbagged, so I would actually say that Dot scored closer to Claude Duet than it did to Muse, because Dot really like got scored for writing a Slack like me. Like, that's not amazing. And it did a good job of code, and it did a good job of orchestrating all the other agents. So, Codex does orchestrate all the other agents, but Dot's not Codex. Um but, it totally failed on anything creative. It wasn't great to work with. So, I would say like Dot is a little bit more towards the Claude end of this ranking than the Muse Grok end of the ranking. And then, poor Claude Duet, um pulling up the rear, 79%super slow. Um it did fix the bug the most completely, and it did my launch video the best, but otherwise either did not complete or lost against all these other models, unfortunately. So, Duet's got some work to do. Okay, so what are my takeaways? Pick your agent for your child, but if you're picking work jobs, probably give it to Grok Bot, and if you're picking life jobs, probably give it to Muse. And OpenAI, Anthropic, get your act together. You're losing to to these other agents. Access really matters, so make sure that you have consistent tool access across your agents if you're trying to benchmark them. I like speed, so fast. I used to say all the time fast beats right, but fast is a very good part of an agent experience. Using artifacts, using different ways to communicate between human and agent, those like quality of life affordances that I call them really do matter. Grok's documents are very nice. And so, the way that the agent is actually designed and presents you information as a human is really important. Number five, safety styles differ. Claude's still a nerd, it's still asking for permissions. So, like when you have a personal agent, striking that right balance between permission giving and proactivity is really important. I really like Muse's sidebar with all the permission asked, so I can don't forget them. But Claude was just way too conservative. And then, at the end of the day, there are still two agents racing for my coding workflows, dot and Duet, which means OpenAI and Anthropic, Codex and Claude. I think this race will continue because this is where a lot of the tokens are being spent, bought, and used. But I would still go to those tools, but I actually wouldn't go to those agents. So, what's interesting about this is while those two agents did the best job in coding, I would not use those agents to code. I would just use the underlying tools and models to code. So, that is it. That is the How I AI agent benchmark. I am so happy to have done this. We now have a framework. When new agents come out, I can definitely run them. And now I'm going to go back to hanging out with my Grok bot, hanging out with my Muse, and ignoring Dot and Duet. Thanks for joining How I AI. Thanks so much for watching. If you enjoyed the show, please like and subscribe here on YouTube or even better, leave us a comment with your thoughts. You can also find this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. Please consider leaving us a rating and review, which will help others find the show. You can see all our episodes and learn more about the show at howiaipod.com. See you next [music] time.

Assistir ao vídeo original no YouTube

Assuntos: Agentes de IA, Assistente pessoal, Dots, Muse. Publicado no YouTube em 2026-10-28.

Seleção automática por assunto e idioma. O vídeo pertence ao canal de origem.