Head to head · Assistant proactive · October 2026 research run

Grok Bot vs ZeroClaw

ZeroClaw scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Grok Bot's 45.2 (E), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories. Both do assistant proactive.

Best AI personal assistants that act for one person · All 190 assistants comparisons

Which one, for what

Grok Bot E

Best for A person or team already paying for Cursor or SuperGrok who wants named assistants that keep working on a cloud computer, with routines and Slack or X entry points, and who will write approval rules.

Also in its favour

  • No incidents deducted, where ZeroClaw loses 3 points for them

Watch for

All of one user's Bots share one cloud computer, with its files, browser sessions and command-line credentials. The docs say separate Bots are not a security boundary

ZeroClaw BB

Best for One person who wants an assistant on their own hardware that answers on Telegram, Discord, Matrix or email, asks before it writes or runs commands, and works with a local model.

Ahead on

  • Reliability, 74 against 40
  • Schema & documentation, 82 against 40
  • Agent ergonomics, 72 against 50
  • Security & auth, 76 against 68
  • Payments & pricing, 60 against 25
  • Maintenance & community, 80 against 20

Also in its favour

  • Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
  • No key needed to call it
  • Free to start without a card
  • Open source

Watch for

The docs state that command execution is not audited. [security.audit] records certificate events only, and tool receipts are opt-in and not durable

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runGrok BotZeroClawEdge
Reliability16%204074ZeroClaw +34
Performance10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Schema & documentation13%16.24082ZeroClaw +42
Agent ergonomics13%16.25072ZeroClaw +22
Security & auth14%17.56876ZeroClaw +8
Payments & pricing10%12.52560ZeroClaw +35
Task success10%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Maintenance & community7%8.82080ZeroClaw +60
Transparency & trust7%8.86664Grok Bot +2
Negative events≤150-3
TotalE 45.2/100BB 70.2/100

Facts side by side

FactGrok BotZeroClaw
KindPlatformAgent harness
VendorSpaceXAI and Cursor (Anysphere, Inc.)ZeroClaw Labs
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthOAuth or keyNone
PricingPaidFree
x402nono
LicenceProprietaryMIT OR Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednoyes
llms.txtyesyes
Last releasenone2026-09-05
Terms last updated2026-09-03no document linked
Privacy policy last updated2026-09-29no document linked
Customer content may train modelsnot found in the text
Terms restrict automated accessnot found in the text
Terms restrict benchmarkingnot found in the text
Terms or service can change without noticenot found in the text
Arbitration or class-action waivernot found in the text
Popularitynone33k stars

Verdicts

Grok Bot

Connector tokens stay on Cursor's backend and each user gets a separate microVM, with approvals, drafts and a review model before risky actions. All of a user's Bots share one computer and its sign-ins, the review model skips memory writes, and the status page shows seven major Grok Bot incidents since 3 September 2026.

ZeroClaw

Supervised autonomy is the default, so tools outside a short read-only list wait for the owner's approval, and secrets are encrypted in the config file. The docs state that command execution is not written to an audit log, and the project publishes no privacy policy or terms.

Before you call either

Grok Bot

  1. State in each request what the Bot may change and where it must stop. Which actions pause for approval depends on the tool, the risk and the owner's Auto-review rules
  2. Add narrow Ask first rules for sending, publishing, purchasing and deleting. Ask first wins over Allow automatically when both match
  3. Treat any sign-in or file on the cloud computer as available to every Bot on the account. Give a workload its own Cursor user when it needs separate credentials
  4. Run Test run with safe inputs. A test run performs real work and can call connected tools
  5. To remove access, pause routines, sign out of sites on the computer, uninstall connectors and revoke them at the source service. Deleting the Bot is not enough

ZeroClaw

  1. Keep [risk_profiles.<alias>] level = "supervised". full runs every tool not listed in always_ask, and the YOLO preset removes the sandbox and path rules too
  2. Add sending and account tools such as send_via, google_workspace and http_request to always_ask so a session-level Always grant cannot skip the prompt
  3. List senders in [peer_groups.<name>] external_peers. ["*"] accepts anyone on that channel
  4. Set [web_fetch].allowed_domains and [http_request].allowed_domains. Fetches run unprompted and the OS sandbox does not block egress
  5. Run one-shot tasks with zeroclaw agent -a <alias> -m "<task>". A cron or webhook turn has no prompt, so shell calls fall to the command policy

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Grok Bot or ZeroClaw?

ZeroClaw scores 70.2 (BB) on agent readiness against Grok Bot's 45.2 (E), and leads in 6 of 7 scored categories.

Are Grok Bot and ZeroClaw open source?

No open-source release is listed for Grok Bot. ZeroClaw is open source (MIT OR Apache-2.0).

Other comparisons with Grok Bot or ZeroClaw

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.