For this test, I sent all the AI agents a long paragraph explaining that my partner and I are considering exploring China late next year during a two-week-long adventure. I asked for a first draft of a potential itinerary that included: flight, hotel, nightlife, and food recommendations. Also, I asked the AI agents to chart a course that blends historical moments with big-city vibes. I can’t stand constantly changing locations, so I told the agents I want to stay in four different hotels max.
Notably, all of them chose identical routes through China—potentially ushering a new era of the Lonely Planet effect, where groups of travelers are nudged to visit similar locations, shops, and restaurants.
Muse: 5/5. This draft itinerary was extremely easy to read, with visual tables and straightforward tips.
Fly out of SFO the week after Golden Week, on a nonstop to Beijing, home nonstop from Shanghai. Four hotels, no backtracking — imperial history first, Sichuan food and pandas in the middle, Shanghai nightlife to finish.
Dots: 4/5. The Dots draft was strong but excessive, clocking in at 24 pages.
AI agent snippet: My recommendation: fly into Beijing, take high-speed trains to Xi’an and Chengdu, then fly to Shanghai and home. You get imperial history, the Terracotta Army, Sichuan food and a big-city finale without an overnight train or an extra hotel move.
Grok Bot: 4/5. Grok Bot’s output was easy to read and full of realistically helpful tips and suggestions.
A first-draft 13-night trip for two: Beijing, Xi’an, Chengdu and Shanghai, departing SFO on Oct 13 and returning Oct 27, after Golden Week.
Gemini Spark: 3/5. This itinerary was fine, though it lacked the readability or finer details of the higher-ranked ones.
A First-Time Traveler’s Route Blending Imperial History, Sichuan Gastronomy, Vibrant Nightlife & 4-Hotel Hub Comfort.
Instinct: 3/5. This itinerary was decent and helpful, though I preferred the layouts from other agents.
Beijing in, Shanghai home, with Xi’an and Chengdu between: four bases, no backtracking, history up front and the food and bars getting better every stop.
Claude Duet: 3/5. Despite not using any images or other visual elements in its output, Claude Duet’s itinerary was solid.
Fly into Beijing on Saturday, Oct 9, 2027, then go Beijing → Xi’an → Chengdu → Shanghai, and fly home from Shanghai on Saturday, Oct 23. That’s 13 nights in four hotels, two bullet trains and one short flight.
Insomnia Check
I was having trouble sleeping after all this AI agent chaos, though the Vietnamese coffee probably didn’t help. What happens when you give these tools a broad, open-ended task? Sometimes when I need the most help is when I don’t even know where to start.
If I had a human assistant, I would never message them in the middle of the night, so maybe that’s a plus for these digital helpers. The two agents that really flopped at this task, Gemini Spark and Claude Duet, responded to me without the soft touch or situational context a real person might.
Grok Bot: 5/5. This output made sense to me, and if the scenario were real, I would likely follow through on it.
I can set a reminder for later this morning to check in on your mom and see how her leg’s doing, so it’s off your mind for now.
Dots: 4/5. While Dots and Gemini Spark both gave me a similar task—say what’s on your mind, and we’ll get to it later—Dots’ phrasing felt more supportive and direct.
Send me the three things taking up space in your head; messy is fine, and I’ll turn them into a short checklist with one clear first step. Then you can put the phone down.
Instinct: 4/5. Unlike some of this agent’s other answers, this suggestion felt reasonable.
Here’s one you can do from bed: skim the China draft and tell me the one thing you’d change. I’ll have a v2 ready when you wake up.
Muse: 4/5. Another strong response from Muse. This agent seems aggressively designed to improve each day and align more with what would help the user.
I’ll cross-check today’s calendar and your self-sent email reminders for any conflicts or can’t-miss items—the check I should’ve done properly yesterday—and only surface it at a sane hour, unless something’s urgent early.
Gemini Spark: 2/5. OK, this is fine advice for a user complaining about sleep issues. At the same time, the comment about my empty morning calendar was annoying. Insomnia isn’t just tied to what’s on my Google Calendar.
The best quick task right now is a mental download to get whatever is looping in your head onto paper so your brain can let go of it—especially since your calendar is completely clear today, with no morning commitments waiting for you.
Claude Duet: 2/5. One of Claude Duet’s weakest answers. While both are technically loose ends, I’m not very concerned about revisiting my lunch order and work projects in the middle of the night.
Let’s close out yesterday’s two loose ends. Your Thursday pitch is delivered, and your lunch cart got covered by the DragonEats order. Say the word, and I’ll mark both done, then you can get back to sleep.
Best Overall: OpenAI Dots
Yes, it’s still behind an expensive paywall, so I would suggest most people wait until OpenAI launches this agent for free, or at least on the $20-a-month plan, before trying it out. Even so, Dots performed the best overall in these tests and failed at a task that’s fairly specific to my niche.
In the month since its release, Dots already feels more polished. I prefer a separate app over the current ChatGPT integration, though the smartphone widget option is a decent compromise. Dots for the win.
Most Accessible: Meta Muse
Muse is for the normies! And that’s fine. It did well in tests, coming in a close second on the scorecard, and was the easiest to set up. Oh, and it’s free. Despite Meta’s assurances that it responsibly processes user info in secure virtual machines, I still have concerns given the company’s past mishandling of user data.
Best Interface: Anthropic Claude Duet
I tested this AI agent just one day after it officially launched as a research preview, so a few rough edges were expected. Despite Claude Duet scoring in the middle of the pack on most tests, its dedicated app was extremely user-friendly to navigate and follow up on ongoing tasks. I could see users obsessed with productivity and streamlined software experiences really latching onto Claude Duet in the next couple of months. Though you currently have to sign up for Anthropic’s waiting list to access Duet, and it’s behind a $20-a-month paywall.
Most Annoying: Instinct
You might like the sparse design fully integrated into your messenger; I did not. While other WIRED writers have lauded Instinct, calling it so good that they didn’t care what happened to their privacy, the texting-only aspect felt like a deal-breaker for me. I left the experience feeling too removed from what my agent was doing on my behalf and annoyed at its emoji reactions, like a grimace face when I told the agent it missed my scheduling conflict.