跳到主要内容Skip to main content
← Coding

xAI Grok BotxAI Grok Bot

xAI
编码agentCoding agent 云端Cloud 厂商云Vendor cloud 常驻Always-on 并行Parallel betabeta 岗位化Role-based partial lifecycle: active 核验Checked 2026-10-23

官方以具体岗位清单说明用途。

它不谈机制,直接列了九个岗位:销售线索、网站搭建、收件箱、会议代听……

The official page explains uses through a list of jobs. It does not discuss mechanism — it just lists nine roles: sales leads, site building, inbox triage, meeting attendance and more.

适合与不适合When to use it, when not to

适合(官方 jobs 清单,可直接当选型依据):

  • 销售线索
  • 网站搭建
  • 收件箱与订阅清理
  • 客服
  • 游戏素材
  • 办公排程
  • 会议代听
  • 退款跟进

不适合:

  • 要求审批机制可查可配置的人 —— 官方材料回答不了,本条最大短板
  • 要本地文件读写的人
  • 要确认底层模型的人

A fit if you pick tools by job to be done. The official list of nine jobs is usable directly as selection criteria (see the tools field): sales leads, site building, inbox and subscription cleanup, customer service, game assets, office scheduling, inbox, meeting attendance, refund follow-up.

Not a fit for four kinds of people:

  • Anyone who needs a checkable, configurable approval mechanism — this entry's most obvious weakness
  • Anyone who needs local file read/write
  • Anyone who needs to confirm the underlying model — the official pages do not name it
  • Non-English-speaking users — the official pages only name platforms (desktop and iOS), with no country list

中文生态China availability 国产 / 国内可直接用 / 备案状态 · 快照domestic / direct access / CAC filing · snapshot 2026-10-20

出品属地Origin
国外出品foreign-made 国外主体(网信办公示名单未见对应备案主体)。foreign entity (no matching filing entity in the CAC registry).
国内使用Direct access
直连不可达direct blocked x.ai 大陆直连稳定超时(同日两次 000)。x.ai times out consistently from mainland (000 twice on the same day).
备案状态CAC filing
未见于备案名单not in filing list:未见于网信办公示名单(2026-10-20 检索 13 批附件,https://www.cac.gov.cn/2024-04/02/c_1713729983803145.htm);该产品未面向大陆公众提供服务,备案不适用。not in the CAC public registry (13 batch attachments searched 2026-10-20, https://www.cac.gov.cn/2024-04/02/c_1713729983803145.htm); the product does not serve the mainland public, so filing does not apply.

备案信息以网信办《生成式人工智能服务已备案信息》公示名单为准(按批次滚动更新,本站只抄编号不解读);「大陆可直连」是本站从大陆网络直连实测的结果,不是厂商承诺。GitHub 类站点当日实测有波动,口径写在依据里。Filing status is quoted from the CAC public registry (updated batch by batch; this site copies the number and does not interpret it). "Direct access" is this site's own reachability measurement from a mainland network, not a vendor promise. GitHub-hosted sites fluctuated on the measurement day — the note says so.

固定坐标系Fixed coordinate system

8 个维度dimensions, 与同分区其他对象逐项可比each comparable item by item against others in the same section.

模型与开放条件Model & openness

官方没点名底层模型,也没说能不能换模型。

(已查 x.ai 的「Introducing Grok Bot」与「Grok Bot is now included with more plans」两页。)

站内平行证据:同期 Introducing Grok 4.6 页写:

官方原文:"a particular focus on long-running agents"

这与 Grok Bot 的常驻定位吻合。

但两页没有互相点名。

所以本站不写「Grok Bot 跑在 4.6 上」(R5:不推断)。

与另两家对比:

  • OpenAI Dot —— 明确写了 GPT‑6 Astra
  • Meta Muse —— 明确写了 Muse Spark
  • Grok Bot —— 留白

是否可换模型、可换哪些,官方未说明。

The official pages name no underlying model and never say whether the model can be swapped.

(x.ai's "Introducing Grok Bot" and "Grok Bot is now included with more plans" pages both checked.)

Parallel in-site evidence: the same-period Introducing Grok 4.6 page writes:

Official wording: "a particular focus on long-running agents"

This matches Grok Bot's always-on positioning.

But the two pages never name each other.

So this site does not write "Grok Bot runs on 4.6" (R5: no inference).

Compared with the other two:

  • OpenAI Dot — explicitly names GPT‑6 Astra
  • Meta Muse — explicitly names Muse Spark
  • Grok Bot — blank

Whether the model can be swapped, and to which ones, is not stated officially.

运行位置Where it runs

形态与另两家同构:一台自己的云端电脑,一直开着。

官方原文:

They have their own computer, work inside tools and apps like you do, and keep working 24/7

另一篇写:

They have their own computer in the cloud. It's always on, with browser and terminal access

有终端,是本条与另两家一个可辨的差异。

官方明确写了 browser and terminal access,而 Dot 与 Muse 官方都只提浏览器。

官方强调的差异点是「工作在真正的工具里,而不是聊天草稿」:

They sign into your apps and work happens in the actual tool instead of a chat draft

可用端:官方写 desktop and iOS。

The form factor is isomorphic with the other two: its own cloud computer, always on.

Official wording:

They have their own computer, work inside tools and apps like you do, and keep working 24/7

Another post writes:

They have their own computer in the cloud. It's always on, with browser and terminal access

Having a terminal is one distinguishable difference between this entry and the other two.

The official wording says browser and terminal access, while both Dot and Muse officially mention only the browser.

The difference the official pages stress is "work happens in the actual tool instead of a chat draft":

They sign into your apps and work happens in the actual tool instead of a chat draft

Available surfaces: official wording says desktop and iOS.

本地文件Local files

官方未提及本地文件系统,工作面在它自己的云端机器。

官方原文用的是单引号,与另一处引用同一句:

They have their own computer. It's always on, with browser and terminal access

可间接看到的工作面是已登录的 app —— 官方例子里有 audit email, Drive, and paid subscriptions,以及:

Works across apps and inboxes

这说明它确实在动邮箱与云盘。

权限粒度与是否全量同步,官方未说明。

(已查两篇发布页与 x.ai/bot 治理规范。)

The official pages never mention the local file system; its workspace is its own cloud machine.

The official wording uses single quotes, citing the same sentence as elsewhere:

They have their own computer. It's always on, with browser and terminal access

The workspace visible indirectly is the signed-in apps — official examples include audit email, Drive, and paid subscriptions, plus:

Works across apps and inboxes

That shows it really does touch mail and cloud drive.

Permission granularity and whether there is full sync are not stated officially.

(Two launch pages and the x.ai/bot governance spec checked.)

关机后的任务Tasks after shutdown

官方直接给了时长承诺:24/7。

首发页原文:

keep working 24/7

另一篇原文:

Bots work across apps and inboxes, keep going when you step away, and only pull you in for judgment calls

这一维度里最清楚的一句是「only pull you in for judgment calls」。

它明确了回调条件是「需要判断的时候」,而不是定时汇报。

还有一个官方给的固化机制:

Ask a Bot to follow along the next time you do the job, so it can run on its own after that

也就是教一次之后自己跑。

并明确它可并行:

Stand up a researcher, writer, and chief of staff. Put them in a group chat so they pass work between themselves

后台自主时工具的权限级别(只读还是读写),官方未说明。

(已查两篇发布页与 x.ai/bot 治理规范 —— 后者只列必审动作,不述权限级别。)

The official pages give a duration promise directly: 24/7.

Launch page wording:

keep working 24/7

Another post's wording:

Bots work across apps and inboxes, keep going when you step away, and only pull you in for judgment calls

The clearest sentence in this dimension is "only pull you in for judgment calls".

It pins the callback condition to "when judgment is needed", not periodic reporting.

There is also an official hardening mechanism:

Ask a Bot to follow along the next time you do the job, so it can run on its own after that

i.e. teach it once, then it runs by itself.

And it is explicitly parallelizable:

Stand up a researcher, writer, and chief of staff. Put them in a group chat so they pass work between themselves

The permission level of tools during autonomous background work (read-only or read-write) is not stated officially.

(Two launch pages and the x.ai/bot governance spec checked — the latter only lists must-approve actions, not permission levels.)

工具与扩展Tools & extensions

官方用「例行工作」清单代替了能力表,这份清单本身就是选型依据。

官方原文列的 jobs:

Bots doing today

清单(九个岗位):

  • Sales prospector —— 销售线索
  • Website builder —— 网站搭建
  • Digital declutterer —— 数字清理
  • Customer support —— 客服
  • Game artist —— 游戏素材
  • Office manager —— 办公排程
  • Inbox manager —— 收件箱
  • Meeting stand-in —— 会议代听
  • Refunds manager —— 退款跟进

官方点名的具体外部服务:payments provider、Gmail、Slack、ServiceTitan、 Quo、client portal、Drive。(官方点名)

它是三条里唯一没提支付结账的 —— 官方没在 Grok Bot 发布页写它能直接结账。

Meta Muse 明确写了 Stripe Link,Dot 未提。本站不推断,仅记录官方未提。

「Website builder」那条官方写了会 purchases the domain and deploys the final version,涉及采购,审批归属未单独说明。

The official pages replace a capability table with a list of "routine jobs", and that list is itself the selection basis.

The jobs listed in official wording:

Bots doing today

The list (nine roles):

  • Sales prospector — sales leads
  • Website builder — site building
  • Digital declutterer — digital cleanup
  • Customer support — support
  • Game artist — game art
  • Office manager — office scheduling
  • Inbox manager — inbox
  • Meeting stand-in — meeting proxy
  • Refunds manager — refund chasing

Specific external services named officially: payments provider, Gmail, Slack, ServiceTitan, Quo, client portal, Drive. (named officially)

It is the only one of the three that never mentions payment checkout — the official Grok Bot launch page does not say it can check out directly.

Meta Muse explicitly names Stripe Link; Dot does not mention it. This site does not infer; it only records that the official pages do not mention it.

The "Website builder" entry officially writes purchases the domain and deploys the final version — procurement is involved, and approval ownership is not separately stated.

上下文与记忆Context & memory

官方表述偏交互记忆,不是上下文窗口。

官方原文:

They remember conversations, learn how you like things done, and get sharper the more work together

接入口是一条文字线程:

A text-thread UX. Message a Bot the way you would message someone on your team, from mobile or desktop, so you can pick up the same thread on either — with nothing to set up first

即跨端续同一条对话线程。

多 Bot 协作有独立描述:在 group chat 里互相传活,用户不在中间。

上下文窗口大小、记忆的存储与删除机制,官方未说明。

(已查两篇发布页与 x.ai/bot 治理规范。对比 Meta Muse 官方给了删除与 forget skill —— 这是本条明显的信息缺口。)

The official framing is interaction memory, not context window.

Official wording:

They remember conversations, learn how you like things done, and get sharper the more work together

The entry point is a single text thread:

A text-thread UX. Message a Bot the way you would message someone on your team, from mobile or desktop, so you can pick up the same thread on either — with nothing to set up first

i.e. the same conversation thread continues across devices.

Multi-Bot collaboration has its own description: they pass work to each other in a group chat, with the user not in the middle.

Context-window size, and how memory is stored and deleted, are not stated officially.

(Two launch pages and the x.ai/bot governance spec checked. By contrast Meta Muse officially provides deletion and a forget skill — this is a conspicuous information gap in this entry.)

权限与限制Permissions & limits

审批只有一层写在发布页上:「回调即审批」。另有一份官方域内的 Bot 治理规范,补上了必审动作清单。

补核验日期 2026-10-03,那份规范的性质见正文「那份治理规范怎么读」一节。

发布页已核验三处:

1. 回调即审批 —— 「only come back when something needs your approval」、 「Leaves every send for you to approve in your inbox or navigator」 2. 例行任务自带保守动词 —— declutterer「Only discards or unsubscribes if you say so」;refunds manager「Comes back with the refund or discount it recovered」,不自行执行退款,把结果拿回来 3. 一个值得记的设计 —— Website builder 官方写 「Helps configure plugins, delivers a live URL, and adds redirect rules」, 它连改域名解析都做,但官网未把它列为需审批项

官方域内 x.ai/bot/… 的 Bot 治理规范给出了明确的审批清单。

原文前缀:

Explicit approval required before…

必审动作:

  • 创建 / 编辑 / 复制 / 隐藏 / 删除 Bot
  • 保存或实质修改 Skill
  • 创建 / 启用 / 编辑 / 暂停 Routine
  • 创建或变更群聊
  • 安装或认证连接器
  • 扩张权限
  • 写入外部源
  • 发送或发布
  • 联系外部人员
  • 采购、转账、改定价、商业承诺
  • 删除或覆写数据
  • 改动生产环境
  • 接受法律条款
  • 敏感雇佣 / 医疗 / 法律 / 财务决策
  • 创建公开分享链接或市场提交

三条与本档案直接相关的行为规约:

1. 沉默不算同意 —— 官方原文「Do not infer approval from silence, vague agreement, a previous approval, another version, or an example」 2. 审批不外溢 —— 官方原文「Approval applies only to the exact action, target, scope, version, configuration, connection, permission, and schedule」 3. 删除要人工 —— 官方原文「Never delete a Bot automatically」 加「Agents cannot be deleted by another agent; the user deletes from the sidebar」

另有两条凭据规则:

Never store credentials

Never request passwords, passkeys, 2FA, private keys, recovery codes, payment confirmations, or API secrets in chat

产品级机制,官方未说明。

官方没有说明的有四项。

可自定义的权限规则界面、自动审核器、审计日志。以及凭据的技术保管方式。

另有一项未说明:那份规范是产品级强制,还是单个 Bot 的约束。

补到的是一份 Bot 行为规范,不是产品机制文档。

(已查两篇发布页与 x.ai/bot 规范。)

Only one approval layer is written on the launch pages: "callback equals approval". A Bot governance spec on the official domain adds the must-approve action list.

Verification supplemented 2026-10-03; the nature of that spec is discussed in the body section "How to read that governance spec".

Three points verified on the launch pages:

1. Callback equals approval — "only come back when something needs your approval", "Leaves every send for you to approve in your inbox or navigator" 2. Routine jobs carry conservative verbs — declutterer "Only discards or unsubscribes if you say so"; refunds manager "Comes back with the refund or discount it recovered" — it does not execute refunds itself, it brings the result back 3. One design worth noting — Website builder officially writes "Helps configure plugins, delivers a live URL, and adds redirect rules", it even changes DNS redirects, yet the official site does not list it as an approval-required item

The Bot governance spec on the official domain x.ai/bot/… gives an explicit approval list.

Original prefix:

Explicit approval required before…

Must-approve actions:

  • Creating / editing / duplicating / hiding / deleting a Bot
  • Saving or materially modifying a Skill
  • Creating / enabling / editing / pausing a Routine
  • Creating or changing group chats
  • Installing or authenticating connectors
  • Expanding permissions
  • Writing to external sources
  • Sending or publishing
  • Contacting external people
  • Purchases, transfers, price changes, commercial commitments
  • Deleting or overwriting data
  • Changing production environments
  • Accepting legal terms
  • Sensitive hiring / medical / legal / financial decisions
  • Creating public share links or marketplace submissions

Three behavioral rules directly relevant to this dossier:

1. Silence is not consent — official wording "Do not infer approval from silence, vague agreement, a previous approval, another version, or an example" 2. Approval does not spill over — official wording "Approval applies only to the exact action, target, scope, version, configuration, connection, permission, and schedule" 3. Deletion requires a human — official wording "Never delete a Bot automatically" plus "Agents cannot be deleted by another agent; the user deletes from the sidebar"

There are also two credential rules:

Never store credentials

Never request passwords, passkeys, 2FA, private keys, recovery codes, payment confirmations, or API secrets in chat

Product-level mechanisms are not stated officially.

Four things the official pages do not state.

A customizable permission-rule UI, an auto-reviewer, audit logs. And the technical custody method for credentials.

One more unstated item: whether that spec is product-level enforcement or a constraint on individual Bots.

What was found is a Bot behavior spec, not a product-mechanism document.

(Two launch pages and the x.ai/bot spec checked.)

适合什么任务Best for

适合按岗位选人的人。

官方给的是一份岗位化的 jobs 清单(见 tools 维),可以当清单用:销售线索、 网站搭建、邮箱清理、客服、游戏素材、办公排程、收件箱、会议代听、退款跟进。

不适合四类人:

  • 需要权限机制可查可配置的人 —— 本条最明显的短板
  • 要本地文件读写的人
  • 需要确认底层模型的人 —— 官方未公布
  • 非英语地区用户 —— 官方只写桌面与 iOS,地区表述只到端、不含国家清单

Fits people who pick agents by job role.

The official pages give a role-based jobs list (see the tools axis), usable as a checklist: sales leads, site building, inbox cleanup, customer support, game art, office scheduling, inbox, meeting stand-in, refund chasing.

Does not fit four kinds of people:

  • People who need the permission mechanism inspectable and configurable — this entry's most obvious shortcoming
  • People who need local file read/write
  • People who need the underlying model confirmed — not published officially
  • Users outside English-speaking regions — official wording covers only desktop and iOS; the regional statement goes only to surfaces, with no country list

头号误解Top misconception

  • 把「独立用量」当成免费 —— 官方只说与主套餐分开算Treating "separate usage" as free — the official pages only say it is billed apart from the main plan
  • 期待能查到审批粒度与凭据机制 —— 官方发布页没写,本档案不替它补Expecting to look up approval granularity and credential handling — the release page does not state them and this entry does not fill them in
  • 拿 Grok 4.6 的「focus on long-running agents」反推它跑的就是 4.6 —— 两页没有互相点名Inferring from Grok 4.6's "focus on long-running agents" that this is what it runs — neither page names the other
  • 以为只支持 SuperGrok —— 官方已扩大到全部 Cursor 档Assuming it only works with SuperGrok — the official pages have already extended it to all Cursor tiers
  • 以为能像 Muse 那样直接付款 —— 官方 Grok Bot 页未提支付结账Assuming it can pay directly the way Muse can — the official Grok Bot page never mentions payment or checkout

未知项清单Known unknowns

  • 底层模型是哪个 —— 官方未点名
  • 是否有自动审核器 —— Dot 有,Grok Bot 发布页未描述
  • 凭据如何保管 —— 只知规范要求「Never store credentials」,技术方式未说明
  • 是否有可自定义的权限规则界面 —— 规范给了清单,但未说明用户能否自己配
  • 是否有审计日志 —— 官方未描述
  • 那份 Bot 行为规范是产品级强制,还是单个 Bot 的约束 —— 文档未说明适用范围
  • 独立用量的具体数值
  • 免费额度的存在与边界 —— 官方只说分主套餐计算,没说是否可免费用
  • 地区可用性 —— 官方只写端,不含国家清单
  • 后台自主时工具的权限级别(只读还是读写)
  • Which underlying model — not named officially
  • Whether there is an auto-reviewer — Dot has one; Grok Bot's launch pages do not describe it
  • How credentials are kept — only the spec's "Never store credentials" is known; the technical method is unstated
  • Whether there is a customizable permission-rule UI — the spec gives a list but does not say users can configure their own
  • Whether there are audit logs — not described officially
  • Whether that Bot behavior spec is product-level enforcement or a per-Bot constraint — the document does not state its scope
  • Concrete numbers for the independent usage
  • Existence and boundary of a free tier — the official pages only say it is billed separately from the main plan, not whether it can be used free
  • Regional availability — official wording covers surfaces only, no country list
  • The permission level of tools during autonomous background work (read-only or read-write)

证据来源Evidence sources

判断可回到以下一手源复核。本站核验日Every judgement can be rechecked against the primary sources below. Verified on 2026-10-23,内容更新日content updated on 2026-10-03。

类型Type名称Name链接Link
officialxAI · Introducing Grok Bot(官方首发页,2026-08-11 beta 上线)xAI · Introducing Grok Bot (official launch page, 2026-08-11 beta launch)https://x.ai/news/introducing-grok-bot
changelogxAI · Grok Bot is now included with more plans(官方扩大范围公告)xAI · Grok Bot is now included with more plans (official scope-expansion notice)https://x.ai/news/grok-bot-more-plans
docsxAI · Bot 行为治理规范(x.ai/bot公开页,补上审批必审动作清单;性质是行为约束非产品文档,见正文「那份治理规范怎么读」)xAI · Bot behavior governance spec (public page on x.ai/bot, adds the must-approve action list; its nature is a behavioral constraint, not product documentation — see body section "How to read that governance spec")https://x.ai/bot/KZ9xav0Qad1U5QigEn7rh
officialxAI · Introducing Grok 4.6(仅用于确认底层模型未点名,两页无互引)xAI · Introducing Grok 4.6 (used only to confirm the underlying model is not named; the two pages never cross-reference)https://x.ai/news/grok-4-6

实测记录Measured runs

本档未跑端到端编码任务;能力结论来自官方文档,编码向测量协议见 protocols/coding/_protocol.md。

实测建议:若能订阅 SuperGrok 或 Cursor 任一档, 本条最该测的是审批触发点。

官方只说「needs your approval」, 那么「Website builder 买域名」到底弹不弹审批,是唯一能补上这个缺口的办法。

不测跑分:它和另两家一样本机不装东西,没有本地基准可跑。

This site has not completed measured runs. The test protocol is at protocols/coding/_protocol.md.

Suggested measurement: if you can subscribe to any SuperGrok or Cursor tier, the single most valuable thing to test in this entry is the approval trigger point.

The official pages only say "needs your approval", so whether "Website builder buying a domain" actually pops an approval prompt is the only way to fill this gap.

Do not test benchmarks: like the other two it installs nothing locally, so there is no local benchmark to run.

取证方式要先说清楚(与另两份不同)The evidence method must be stated first (different from the other two)

本条没能直抓官方页,正文取自域限定检索。

档案取证方式
OpenAI DotPlaywright 直抓 openai.com,5,166 字逐节核对
Meta MusePlaywright 直抓 about.fb.com,7,655 字逐节核对
本条x.ai 直抓 ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT(连接超时);正文取自域限定检索(allowed_domains: x.ai)返回的官方页内容

为什么仍算官方源: 检索被限定在 x.ai 域内, 返回的正文是该域页面的内容,不是第三方转述。

但要如实说:没能直抓复核。

(已核验范围仅到检索返回的正文。逐字引用时需重新核验。)

这也直接决定了 permissions 这一维的结论 —— 见下。

This entry could not be captured directly from the official pages; the body text comes from domain-scoped search.

DossierEvidence method
OpenAI DotPlaywright direct capture of openai.com, 5,166 words checked section by section
Meta MusePlaywright direct capture of about.fb.com, 7,655 words checked section by section
This entryDirect capture of x.ai hit ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT; body text comes from official-page content returned by domain-scoped search (allowed_domains: x.ai)

Why it still counts as an official source: the search was restricted to the x.ai domain, and the returned body is that domain's page content, not third-party retelling.

But to be honest: no direct recapture verification was possible.

(Verified scope covers only the body returned by the search. Verbatim quoting requires re-verification.)

This also directly determines the conclusion of the permissions axis — see below.

三份里只有本条查不到审批机制Of the three, only this entry cannot find the approval mechanism

这是本档案最该先说的一件事。

三家的机制对照:

OpenAI DotMeta MuseGrok Bot
审批机制自动审核 + 自定义规则 + 敏感动作永远人工独立 Sentinel agent,系统级隔离发布页未描述;域内 Bot 规范列了必审动作清单
凭据用已存密码不向模型暴露Secure Credentials Store发布页未描述;规范只写「Never store credentials」
审计活动视图完整轨迹,含「plans to do」发布页未描述

「回调即审批」这一层已核验:

only come back when something needs your approval Leaves every send for you to approve in your inbox or navigator

2026-10-03 补:域内那份 Bot 行为规范补上了审批粒度(哪些动作必审)。

但它没有补上「用户能否自己配置规则」「审计日志」「凭据如何保管」。

所以上表后两行仍标「发布页未描述」,这是准确的。

选型含义仍然成立,但理由要换。

若「审批机制是否可查可配」是硬要求,本条依然无法从官方材料完整回答 —— 补到的是一份 Bot 行为规范,不是产品机制文档。

要答案只能问 xAI,不要按「应该有」来假设。

This is the single most important thing this dossier should say up front.

The three vendors' mechanism comparison:

OpenAI DotMeta MuseGrok Bot
Approval mechanismAuto-review + custom rules + sensitive actions always humanIndependent Sentinel agent, system-level isolationNot described on the launch pages; the in-domain Bot spec lists must-approve actions
CredentialsUses stored passwords without exposing them to the modelSecure Credentials StoreNot described on the launch pages; the spec only says "Never store credentials"
AuditActivity viewFull trace, including "plans to do"Not described on the launch pages

The "callback equals approval" layer is verified:

only come back when something needs your approval Leaves every send for you to approve in your inbox or navigator

Supplemented 2026-10-03: the in-domain Bot behavior spec adds approval granularity (which actions require approval).

But it does not add "whether users can configure their own rules", "audit logs", or "how credentials are kept".

So the last two rows of the table above still read "not described on the launch pages", and that is accurate.

The selection implication still holds, but the reason changes.

If "is the approval mechanism inspectable and configurable" is a hard requirement, this entry still cannot be answered completely from official material — what was found is a Bot behavior spec, not a product-mechanism document.

For an answer you must ask xAI; do not assume "it should be there".

那份治理规范怎么读(重要,别当成产品机制)How to read that governance spec (important — do not mistake it for product mechanics)

x.ai 域内有一份公开的 Bot 行为规范(x.ai/bot/…), 里面有一份相当完整的审批清单。

它补上了发布页缺失的审批粒度,但性质必须说清。

内容
它是什么一个 Bot 的行为约束说明 —— 它自己该怎么做、什么该先问
❌ 它不是什么不是产品文档;不是产品级的权限机制说明;不代表所有 Bot 都受同一套约束;不能替代「用户界面里能不能配规则」这个问题的答案

这个区分为什么重要:

它给的是「这个 Bot 被要求怎么做」, 不是「这个产品允许你配置什么」。

用户真正想知道的是「我能不能自己划定哪些动作要审批」—— 这份文档没有回答这个问题,所以 permissions 仍不能算补齐。

但它有两条设计值得单独记,这两条与另两家形成有意思的对照:

1. 「Do not infer approval from silence」 —— 沉默不算同意。这比 Dot 的「Ask for some actions / Always ask」两档更严: xAI 在规范层面明确禁止从「不反对」推出「同意」。 2. 「Approval applies only to the exact action, target, scope, version, configuration, connection, permission, and schedule」 —— 审批精确到单个动作与单个配置,不外溢到下一次。 这与 Muse 的这几档粒度选项形成对照:

  • Allow once / for this task / for this site / Always allow

这是两种不同粒度的思路:Muse 提供有效期选项, Grok Bot 这份规范则只承认一次性批准。

三家审批模型对照(补核验后)

审批粒度沉默是否算同意有效期选项
OpenAI Dot自定义规则 + 内置底线 + 自动审核未见表述未见表述
Meta Muse五档选项未见表述有(once / task / site / always)
Grok Bot规范列必审动作清单明确不算只认单次批准

There is a public Bot behavior spec on the x.ai domain (x.ai/bot/…) containing a fairly complete approval list.

It fills the approval granularity missing from the launch pages, but its nature must be made clear.

Content
What it isA behavioral-constraint statement for one Bot — how it should act, what it should ask first
What it ❌ is notNot product documentation; not a product-level permission-mechanism statement; it does not mean all Bots are bound by the same ruleset; it cannot answer "can rules be configured in the user UI"

Why this distinction matters:

It tells you "how this Bot is required to behave", not "what this product lets you configure".

What users really want to know is "can I decide myself which actions need approval" — this document does not answer that question, so permissions still cannot count as filled.

But two of its designs deserve separate note, and they form interesting contrasts with the other two vendors:

1. "Do not infer approval from silence" — silence is not consent. This is stricter than Dot's two tiers of "Ask for some actions / Always ask": xAI explicitly forbids inferring consent from "not objecting", at the spec level. 2. "Approval applies only to the exact action, target, scope, version, configuration, connection, permission, and schedule" — approval is pinned to the single action and single configuration; it does not spill into the next time. This contrasts with Muse's granularity options:

  • Allow once / for this task / for this site / Always allow

These are two different granularity philosophies: Muse offers validity-duration options, while this Grok Bot spec recognizes one-time approval only.

Three-vendor approval model comparison (after the supplement)

Approval granularityDoes silence count as consentDuration options
OpenAI DotCustom rules + built-in floor + auto-reviewNo statement seenNo statement seen
Meta MuseFive-tier optionsNo statement seenYes (once / task / site / always)
Grok BotSpec lists must-approve actionsExplicitly notSingle-use approval only

两处值得单独记的细节Two details worth noting separately

① 例行任务用保守动词

官方原文:

Digital declutterer — Audits email, Drive, and paid subscriptions around the clock.
Only discards or unsubscribes if you say so.

Refunds manager — Finds the claim, files it, and follows it through.
Comes back with the refund or discount it recovered.

declutterer 持续审计,但只有你说了才丢。 refunds manager 走完流程,但把结果拿回来给你。

官方描述里这些任务都没有「自行执行」 —— 这是官方页面文本呈现出的行为边界,不是推测。

② 但 Website builder 那条把采购和部署都做了

官方原文:

Website builder — Builds the site, purchases the domain, and deploys
the final version. Helps configure plugins, delivers a live URL,
and adds redirect rules.

买域名 + 上线 + 改解析都做了,而官网没把它列成需审批项。

这与 ① 的保守措辞形成不一致。

本站照实记录这个不一致 —— 不替厂商圆场, 也不把它当作审批缺漏的定论(可能审批在产品内而不在发布页)。

① Routine jobs use conservative verbs

Official wording:

Digital declutterer — Audits email, Drive, and paid subscriptions around the clock.
Only discards or unsubscribes if you say so.

Refunds manager — Finds the claim, files it, and follows it through.
Comes back with the refund or discount it recovered.

The declutterer audits continuously but discards only if you say so. The refunds manager runs the whole process but brings the result back to you.

In the official descriptions none of these jobs "execute on its own" — this is the behavioral boundary as presented by the official page text, not speculation.

② But the Website builder entry does both purchasing and deploying

Official wording:

Website builder — Builds the site, purchases the domain, and deploys
the final version. Helps configure plugins, delivers a live URL,
and adds redirect rules.

Buying the domain + going live + changing redirects are all done, and the official site does not list it as an approval-required item.

This is inconsistent with the conservative wording of ①.

This site records the inconsistency as-is — no cover-up for the vendor, and no verdict that an approval is missing either (approval may live in the product rather than on the launch page).

底层模型:官方没点名,本档案不推断Underlying model: not named officially, so this dossier does not infer

  • OpenAI Dot:明确 GPT‑6 Astra
  • Meta Muse:明确 Muse Spark
  • Grok Bot:官方页未给模型名

站内能看到 Grok 4.6 的发布页写着「a particular focus on long-running agents」, 而 Grok Bot 正是常驻型 —— 但两页没有互相点名。

所以本站不写「Grok Bot 跑在 4.6 上」。

理由:v3 铁律「给判断依据,不给虚假结论」—— 「两个产品定位吻合」不是「同一模型」的依据。

  • OpenAI Dot: explicitly GPT‑6 Astra
  • Meta Muse: explicitly Muse Spark
  • Grok Bot: the official pages give no model name

In-site one can see the Grok 4.6 launch page writing "a particular focus on long-running agents", and Grok Bot is exactly the always-on type — but the two pages never name each other.

So this site does not write "Grok Bot runs on 4.6".

Reason: the v3 rule "give the basis for judgment, not false conclusions" — "two products' positioning matches" is not evidence for "the same model".

计费:与另两家是不同的结构Billing: a different structure from the other two

这条官方口径两篇官方页都重复了,是官方特别强调的点。

Grok Bot comes with its own usage, separate from your Grok and Cursor plans, so anything you hand off to a Bot won't count against your existing usage.

三家的结构对比:

DotMuseGrok Bot
买什么Pro / Business Premium 附带大部分需求免费 + 订阅档SuperGrok / Cursor 各档附带
与主套餐额度关系Dot 对话不计入;派给 Codex 的任务照常计入官方未说明独立用量,与主套餐分开

三家用三种不同的结构,不要按「厂商云 agent 都一样」来理解。

⚠ 独立用量的具体数值官方两篇都没给,需自行到官网核。

This official statement is repeated on both official pages — a point the vendor stresses.

Grok Bot comes with its own usage, separate from your Grok and Cursor plans, so anything you hand off to a Bot won't count against your existing usage.

The three vendors' structures compared:

DotMuseGrok Bot
What you buyBundled with Pro / Business PremiumMost needs free + subscription tiersBundled with SuperGrok / Cursor tiers
Relation to main-plan quotaDot chats don't count; tasks handed to Codex do countNot stated officiallyIndependent usage, separate from the main plan

The three use three different structures — do not assume "vendor-cloud agents are all the same".

⚠ The concrete numbers for the independent usage are given by neither official page; check the official site yourself.

采集限制Collection limitations

页面状态
Introducing Grok Bot⚠️ 直抓超时(ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT),正文取自 x.ai 域限定检索
Grok Bot is now included with more plans⚠️ 同上
Introducing Grok 4.6⚠️ 同上;仅用于确认「官方未点名」,不用于推断模型
x.ai/bot/… Bot 行为规范✅ 2026-10-03 取到正文,补上 permissions 的审批粒度(性质是行为约束,见正文)

三页发布页均未能直抓复核 —— 这是本条 confidence 定 partial 的原因之一。

2026-10-03 变化:另找到一份域内 Bot 行为规范正文, 把 permissions 从「官方页完全没写」推进到 「有必审动作清单,但产品级机制(可配规则 / 审计日志 / 凭据保管)仍无官方说明」。

因此 confidence 仍为 partial。

但缺口已从「权限机制整块空白」收窄为 「权限的产品级机制与审计日志」这一项。

三页均未能直抓复核 —— 这是本条 confidence 定 partial 的主要原因。 另外权限机制本身在官方页就没写,即使能抓也补不上。

PageStatus
Introducing Grok Bot⚠️ Direct capture timed out (ERR_CONNECTION_TIMED_OUT); body from x.ai domain-scoped search
Grok Bot is now included with more plans⚠️ Same as above
Introducing Grok 4.6⚠️ Same as above; used only to confirm "not named officially", never to infer the model
x.ai/bot/… Bot behavior spec✅ Body captured 2026-10-03, adding permissions approval granularity (nature is behavioral constraint, see body)

None of the three launch pages could be directly recaptured for verification — one reason this entry's confidence is partial.

Change on 2026-10-03: an in-domain Bot behavior spec body was found, moving permissions from "completely absent from official pages" to "a must-approve action list exists, but product-level mechanisms (configurable rules / audit logs / credential custody) still have no official statement".

Therefore confidence remains partial.

But the gap has narrowed from "the whole permission mechanism is blank" to the single item "product-level permission mechanisms and audit logs".

None of the three pages could be directly recaptured — the main reason confidence is set to partial. Also the permission mechanism itself is simply not written on the official pages, so even direct capture could not fill it.

相关条目Related entries

本页由This page is generated from the ai-handbook 数据层生成(CC BY 4.0)。data layer (CC BY 4.0). 方法论与坐标系定义见仓库内For the methodology and coordinate definitions, see METHODOLOGY.md.