dotsfeed
← News

Independent lab scores OpenAI Dots 8.8/10 on real business tasks — behind Claude Cowork and ChatGPT Work

Verified· Oct 23, 2026Published Oct 23, 2026

An independent test lab gave five AI agents the same 10 real business tasks. Claude Cowork scored 9.3/10, ChatGPT Work 9.15/10, OpenAI Dots 8.8/10, Gemini Spark 8.7/10, and Meta Muse a 6.5/10 overall impression.

What happened

An independent test lab (aiagentslibrary.com, no sponsorships, failures included) gave five AI agents — Claude Cowork, ChatGPT Work, OpenAI Dots, Gemini Spark and Meta Muse — a run sheet of 10 comparable real business tasks each, scored on the same five criteria between August and October 2026. It is the first head-to-head measurement of Dots against its agent rivals on real work.

The measured averages: Claude Cowork 9.3/10, ChatGPT Work 9.15/10, OpenAI Dots 8.8/10, Gemini Spark 8.7/10. Meta Muse, tested September 27 on the free plan, earned a 6.5/10 overall impression (8.0 average across its eight scored tasks; four planned tasks went unscored after it hit password or Full Disk Access requests the reviewer would not approve).

Dots was tested September 30 to October 1, 2026 — the day after launch — on a ChatGPT Pro account with Google Workspace, GitHub, ChatGPT Sites, Figma, Adobe, Stripe and Slack connected. Its strongest results were four tasks at 9.8/10: accurate platform research, publishing a page through ChatGPT Sites from one prompt, a content plan from real business context, and a recurring scheduled job. Its weakest was post-meeting follow-up at 7/10, and its clearest failure was a spreadsheet that reported passing 27 formula checks and then broke on import to Google Sheets — the reviewer notes "a self-reported pass is not verification."

The reviewer also reported a separate 9.2/10 overall experience rating for Dots, reflecting the always-on experience (scheduling, phone notifications, Slack, voice calls) that the five criteria do not score.

Why it matters

This is one of the first independent, task-by-task measurements of Dots as a working agent rather than a feature demo — and it lands third of five. For buyers comparing always-on agents, the spread is tight at the top (9.3 vs 9.15 vs 8.8), and the lab's verdict on Dots' spreadsheet failure is a useful caution: judge agents on imported, usable output, not on their self-reported checks.

Sources: https://www.aiagentslibrary.com/ai-agent-test-lab/ — Verified October 23, 2026.

Sources

Get updates like this every morning

  1. ① Email
  2. ② Card on Stripe
  3. ③ 7 days free

Then $2/month · cancel anytime in one click