Grok Bot vs. Muse vs. Dots for Professional Services Firms

Grok Bot, Muse, and dots are all always-on agents with their own cloud computer, and all three plan each task with a model. Grok Bot has the most developed firm controls on its Enterprise plan. Muse is a consumer agent with a careful permission system and no business admin. dots have the widest app reach and layered action rules. None of them claims repeatable runs or a firm-level books-and-records archive, which is what repeated client work needs.

In about seven weeks, the three largest consumer AI companies shipped the same product. xAI launched Grok Bot in beta on August 11. Meta launched Muse on September 8. OpenAI announced dots at DevDay on September 29. Each one gives you an agent with its own computer and browser that signs into your apps and works toward goals in the background, asking before it does anything sensitive.

For professional services firms, the interesting question is not which one is smartest. It is which one a firm could supervise, and for which work. This comparison sticks to what the vendors themselves publish, as of October 1, 2026.

At a glance

Will they do the work the same way every time?

None of the three says so. Grok Bot comes closest: you can teach a Bot a task by recording up to ten minutes of yourself doing it, and it turns that into a draft skill that a routine can run on a schedule. But a skill is a set of instructions the model carries out each time, and xAI's docs tell you to re-test skills when a website, plugin, or file format changes. Muse is goal-driven and describes only its approval cards and credential storage as deterministic. dots work from a goal plus Custom Rules, and OpenAI notes a dot can make mistakes even when following them.

That is fine for a person's own work. For a procedure a firm runs two hundred times a month, like opening accounts or matters, it means each run is decided again, so testing last month's cases does not tell you how the next one will go.

Who approves what?

All three vendors put real work into action controls, and all three say they deliberately avoid asking about everything, because people stop reading prompts. Grok Bot offers Allow once, Always allow, or Deny, with an Auto Review model checking risky actions; on Enterprise, admins can enforce review rules for the whole team. Muse routes every connector action and network request through Sentinel, a separate agent that allows, denies, or asks, with grants that can last one time or forever. dots let you set each kind of action to proceed, proceed if pre-approved, ask first, or hand off, with Auto-review checking planned actions and hard stops on deletes, security access, password changes, and money transfers.

These controls supervise individual actions. A law firm under ABA Model Rule 5.3, or an RIA under the SEC compliance rule, also has to supervise the procedure: what the agent is supposed to do, and whether it did that. Approval prompts do not answer that question on their own.

Can the firm show what the agent did?

Grok Bot is the only one with a firm-level record today, on its Enterprise plan: audit logs that can stream to a SIEM, plus Action Recording of what Bots did, which is off by default and kept for 90 days. Self-serve Teams do not get the audit log. Muse gives each user an activity log of what it has done and plans to do. dots give each user an Activity View of tasks in progress, scheduled, and completed.

For an RIA, SEC Rule 204-2 requires keeping copies of certain written communications, generally for five years. For a law firm, the question comes from clients, auditors, and courts. In both cases a per-user activity feed is a starting point, not a record the firm can retain and produce.

What happens to client data?

Defaults differ more than you might expect. Grok Bot does not train on customer data with Privacy Mode on, runs its computers in the United States, and has no per-organization retention policy yet. Muse trains on sanitized activity by default with an opt-out, and Meta says its current architecture does not prevent Meta from accessing data to operate the service, with a user-keyed Confidential VM planned. dots on Business, Enterprise, and Edu plans do not train on content by default, and disconnecting an app does not delete what a dot already pulled from it.

All three vendors are candid that prompt injection is not solved. For agents holding a lawyer's or adviser's inbox and file access, that sits squarely inside confidentiality duties.

Which one fits which work?

For a person's own varied work, all three are impressive, and the choice mostly follows which ecosystem your firm already lives in. For a firm rollout today, Grok Bot for Enterprise has the most complete admin layer. dots have the widest app reach. Muse is built for individuals and small businesses rather than firms.

For repeated client work, the answer is the same for all three: pair them with an agent the firm can verify. That means a hybrid agent that runs the workflow as code, uses AI for the judgment steps inside it, logs each one, and leaves a record for every run. That is what Caddi builds for law firms, RIAs, and professional services firms: your team shows the workflow on a screen share or describes it in chat, and Caddi runs it across your tools, changing it in plain English when the work changes. Across Caddi customers, 99% of agent runs complete successfully.

Guides by firm type

Keep reading

• What are verifiable AI agents?
• What are hybrid agents?
• Governed AI is the only AI professional services can use