The Bot in Grok Bot is indeed a renamed session.
A few guys have already confirmed that all Bots run on the same machine and share the filesystem with each other. No isolation between jobs.
Our recipe: an always-on VM for every autonomous agent-teammate.
I can’t quite explain how Grok Bot makes me feel.
It’s pretty bare-bones, and may not match Codex or Claude Code on complex tasks. The Linux computer, memory, skills, plugins, and automations are all familiar from Hermes, OpenClaw, ChatGPT, and Claude.
Taken apart, a Bot also looks a lot like a renamed session: a name, a job description, and a few scheduled tasks.
Codex and Claude Code can keep files and use a built-in browser too. When a login, verification code, or payment requires me, I can take over the computer and hand it back to the agent afterward.
What feels different is how the product is organized.
When I open Codex or Claude Code, I mostly see a task or session. Grok Bot starts by asking me to name the Bot and give it a job.
Its computer, files, browser sessions, memory, and routines all sit under that name. When I come back later, the same Bot and the same computer are still there.
Hermes or OpenClaw can give me something similar, but I have to build and maintain the whole setup myself. The server, keys, processes, and updates are all mine to manage.
Grok Bot hosts the computer for me and ties it to one named role. Even after a short try, I was already thinking about which jobs I would leave with each Bot.
The closest analogy I have is a furnished office. The desk, files, and keycard stay where they are, while someone else maintains the building.
I’m still not sure that feeling is enough to become a real long-term advantage.
And I’m already paying $200 each for Codex and Claude. I can’t think of a good reason to add another subscription. My wallet would probably object too lol.