I’ve really been enjoying Instinct, a personal AI agent. The simplest description for it is: OpenClaw for normal people. It feels like magic. And contrary to what some people have said, I don’t think the appeal is limited to Silicon Valley types, we are setting my dad up with it too. I’ve exchanged 677 messages with Instinct in the past five days. Here are some of the things it has done for me: 1) I asked who I should see about fixing my flat feet. It recommended starting with a podiatrist, found a well-reviewed one who takes my insurance, and filled out all the paperwork for me. I HATE finding in-network doctors, so this is a great use case for me. 2) It helped decrease my Comcast bill from $100/month to $60/month. It hit a wall on this one but gave me a number to call and an exact script. The call took three minutes. 3) We’re ordering custom merch for my brother’s wedding. It found vendors and is messaging several of them on WhatsApp- asking questions, comparing options, and negotiating prices while I’m asleep because the vendors are in India. 4) I’m planning his bachelor party. Everyone posted their arrival details in a WhatsApp group, so I asked Instinct to organize everything in a spreadsheet. It has access to my WhatsApp, so there was nothing for me to copy and paste. 5) My wife and I are going a wellness retreat (Miraval) in a couple of weeks, where many of the activities need to be booked in advance. After some back-and-forth about what we’d enjoy, Instinct researched the highest-rated activities and booked them for us. Massage slots appeared to be unavailable online, so it emailed the hotel from my account, found times that worked for us, and booked those too. 6) It did something similar for a girls’ trip my wife is taking with a friend, but booked very different activities for the two of them than it did for us. 7) It booked a DMV appointment for my new driver’s license. 8) It canceled all my Amazon Subscribe & Save subscriptions. 9) It activated all the free offers on my credit cards, just in case. I can't be bothered with those but if it's no work on my end there is no harm 10) It price-shopped my car insurance and concluded that I already have the best rate through Tesla. 11) My wife and I are traveling on the same United flight but booked on separate tickets. Instinct contacted United and linked our itineraries, a task that requires chatting with the airline and can’t be done through self-service. 12) It found and booked a factory tour at an Amazon fulfillment center that I'd been meaning to do, at a time that fit my calendar. 13) It suggested topics for a podcast I was appearing on. I didn’t end up using all of them, but they were pretty good. 14) It reminded me about a bunch of unused gift cards I had forgotten about. 15) I sent it a photo of a toll notice. It paid the toll, discovered another outstanding one, and paid that too. None of these things is individually life-changing. Some of these things can be done via their own apps... But together, they represent hours of annoying life admin I didn’t have to do, and I have one easy place (imessage!) to do them. There’s an obvious question: why doesn’t ChatGPT, or, Meta or Google already do all of this? The underlying technology clearly exists- to use tools and complete multi-step tasks. But they haven't packaged it as a persistent personal operator with this level of access to your accounts and communications. The other AI's are also more cautious about purchases, cancellations, messages, and other external actions, so they will often stop for confirmation, which kills the vibe tbh! Note: I haven't been playing with Grok Bot yet, which I think does a lot of this. A year ago I thought memory was the killer feature and it was awesome that ChatGPT had it, but Meta and Google had even more context / a natural advantage that they could ride on to be your personal AI agent. Meta's data with WhatsApp, etc...; Google with Gmail, Calendar, Chrome, and Android. But I've found the data that Instinct gets from being connected to your email to be pretty sufficient to get started and it can fill in the gaps. And the amount of context Google/Meta have that could make their assistants incredibly useful would also create enormous privacy, compliance, and trust problems for them. Plenty of people are uncomfortable giving those companies this much visibility into their lives, lawyers and lawmakers would come after them like crazy... not to mention there are probably all sorts of T&C's that Instinct is breaking. It is a bit scary how much information Instinct has and what it can do. We're going to start to see a new excuse: "I didn't send that email, it was my AI assistant" Anyway, good opening for Instinct. Much less about having a uniquely capable model and more about the product harness around it: integrations, permissions, context, persistence, willingness to keep working until the task is finished. Something like: ChatGPT/Claude still feel like assistants that you operate, but Instinct is an assistant you employ. Very cool product. It has the potential to make life easier for a lot of people. Excited to see more develop here. And if you want to sign up go here: t.co/Nu8pNhKyiM currently on waitlist. I don't have any more invites. I gave out 100+ invites on here and they were taken in 2 mins. If I get more I'll post them!

Personal Agents Notes (Instinct / Grok Bots / ChatGPT Work): - The three products to look at are Instinct, Grok Bots and ChatGPT Work. All three feel like the distillation of patterns established by OpenClaw earlier this year: persistent agents with cloud(ish) computers, browser access, cached credentials and recurring loops—plus a top-level orchestration agent with visibility into every other agent/thread that can report across them and dispatch work on the user’s behalf. - Browser use is now good enough to do most web-based work, modulo CAPTCHAs / 2FA / occasional brittle flows. The interesting product variable is increasingly presumptuousness/resourcefulness: how much permission does the agent assume / how resourcefully does it recover from failure. - Instinct and Grok are both very aggressive here. I had both shop and purchase things for me overnight and they were remarkably effective. Instinct couldn’t access one website, so it reset the password and completed the task .. resourceful!! Slightly insane!! Also a good example of why it may do things that ChatGPT Work probably won’t. - Instinct has made every possible tradeoff toward a dedicated consumer product: iMessage as the primary interface, one continuous relationship and almost no visible machinery. This is probably the simplest mental model, but a single long-running thread creates real constraints—sufficiently ambitious work needs isolated context, tools and memory vs endless compaction. Definitely built on the very good lessons of Poke. - Grok Bots feels more like an enterprise agent platform though it works well for prosumers as well. Named agents are probably more intuitive than threads for most knowledge workers, and features like connecting multiple accounts from the same service — personal Gmail, work Gmail, etc. — are very thoughtful. I’m less convinced that the agent group-chat metaphor will be intuitive but this may be more of a powertool while the average user simply chats with a single agent. - ChatGPT Work is currently the least aggressive of the three, but probably has the best overall interface and balance of tradeoffs: an omni-agent front door, specialized threads underneath, full-duplex voice and access to both consumer + coding workflows. Its reluctance around credentials, payments and consequential actions feels like a compliance choice vs a technology constraint, I'll be curious if they close the gap as Grok/Instinct take off. - Full-duplex voice makes this architecture much more natural because you can continuously steer the orchestrator while work happens asynchronously. Grok currently treats voice mostly as transcription; ChatGPT is much closer to the experience of actually managing many parallel loops through conversation. - The cloud / local question roughly maps to knowledge work / coding. Knowledge work benefits enormously from an always-on cloud VM that can keep operating while you’re away. Coding still frequently depends on repositories, credentials and tools on localhost—although much more coding should already have moved into the cloud and probably will. - The initial consumer wedge has been an open question for me... email + calendar are natural candidates but many consumers barely use a personal calendar and receive very little consequential email; productivity alone is unlikely to be the mass-market hook. - The aha moment for me was seeing these agents shop for me .. /shopping may be the first loop that really sticks because it combines research + judgment + execution and produces an immediately legible outcome. It is one of the first use cases where the product clearly feels like labor vs software. But it is probably (hopefully!) the beginning of a broader set of consumer loops across family / finance / health / social / self-improvement—each of which requires some combination of information, motivation and follow-through. - The transition we need to take consumers through is prompts → loops → sets of loops. The progression is natural in the enterprise because the loops are already explicit i.e. bug fixing, feature development, sales, support, procurement. Consumer loops are less formally defined but ultimately much broader and more consequential. Arguably personal agents have far more implications for consumers + society than coding agents because they represent zero marginal cost work. Every consumer can live a “fully hacked” life; every decision that requires information, motivation and follow-through can eventually be made and executed on their behalf. This means every software product can now be delivered as a service: family office for every family, concierge doctor for every patient, life coach for every person, etc. The personal-agent market should be at least as large as coding agents and perhaps much larger. So I don’t think this is fundamentally a capability or demand question anymore. Browser use is good enough and the latent demand for labor is effectively unlimited. The open question is product design + distribution: which initial loop earns enough trust, context and permission to expand into the rest of someone’s life? The steelman for a new consumer entrant is that Grok will split its attention between enterprise and consumer while ChatGPT Work remains embedded inside a much broader product. Dedicated consumer focus could produce a genuinely divergent product .. but the thing to underwrite is retention around a real loop, not the magic of the first session. Excited to see where all this goes!! aa + 5.6

I’ve been using Instinct and yes, it’s impressive. But more importantly, by posting about this I’m signaling that I’m better - maybe even smarter or more handsome - than you, presumably a non-Instinct user.

I regret to inform you I think instinct is pretty good

i am 12 hours into using Instinct. have had 3 wow moments today already. i know how cliche it is to tweet it and signal being in the zeitgeist. dont care. the product is exceptional. i would say roughly 100x better than Poke

I'm pretty skeptical of most hyped up AI products on twitter... but so far Instinct has been pretty magical.

Impressive onboarding flow from Instinct. First agent that I’ve had automatically research who I am in the background before the first conversation. Expect this becomes a default expectation for agent experiences

I asked Instinct to buy me a book on Amazon. The next day, it showed up at my house. The new generation of B2C AI products have no apps, no sweet UI it’s just text messages on SMS/Whastapp. The innovation with Instinct is Computer Use. The AI has access to a web browser and it sends you a secure link to connect your account with email/password, then uses log in and do the work. It’s extremely slow, but SMS makes that feel fine because it’s async. Computer use is the bridge to websites that still have no clean API, CLI or MCP for agents. Eventually every ecommerce company will expose agent APIs imo. Until then, agents will simply use their websites like we do! Sweet experience.

Ok I'm converted. Instinct is excellent.

t.co/FtjNJVqFVI is giving me a chatGPT-like moment of amazement and wonder right now even though i'm just scratching the surface and only using it on personal stuff thus far, i'm finding it tremendously useful

im planning my wedding and using instinct a lot to get quotes for things like chairs and whatnot. i dont think people are ready for an era of price normalization driven by agent assisted workflows when booking real world services.

Yoooo wtf is this Instinct thing??? Can somebody send me an invite

if anyone needs an invite link to instinct lmk t.co/iN8zCMvSmD

100% agree here as someone who loves trying every hot new AI tool. GrokBot was a mental unlock in all the things it can do without my involvement. Excited to also try Instinct although iMessage doesn't seem intuitive. ChatGPT work *feels* different in its application. t.co/qnAxNi6v8G

Finally got on the bandwagon and tested out Instinct. A few quick thoughts: - compared to openclaw which was SO much worn to set up, this is amazing. Instantly working - it’s blazing fast compared to Claude code / traditional coding agents. No, text-format is not the difference - I have a separate CC session channeled into Telegram and the type of stuff that’d take minutes with CC takes seconds with Instinct - most impressively it seems to ramp up on context and preference very fast, and has a “good aim”. I asked it to pick a few most interesting tweets based on what I post about on X and my writing and it did a very decent job - there must be some blazing fast concurrent browser sessions / tooling in the background - I pushed it to describe the trust and context boundary and unfortunately we are still stuck with the same “leash length” + “context gate” tradeoff I wrote about. It wants me to auth into logged in browser sessions…I don’t know if I want an agent with write access to the outside world to have it - yes I use Claude in Chrome all the time to have CC do stuff for me, but there’s a (false?) sense of security by being able to see what it’s doing on my computer (even though I don’t really babysit it) - if it can call vendors for me that’d be 5x more useful All this being said, I still don’t know if everyday consumers will want to “get more stuff done/hack your life” like us on X do :)

Who needs access to Instict? i’ve been using Instinct for the last few hours, pretty impressive for a personal agent. Perfect for normies-going to set it up for my mom! Much better than openclaw imo. Have a few invites left, lmk if you need one:)

Just wanna post that I have access to Instinct in order to prove out I have the social capital to procure an invite, but I have yet to use it to its full potential & will abstain from hyperbolic commentary for now

Instinct is the new Clubhouse.

instinct is the real deal. Wish it had a little less Claude voice, but browser use + stored creds and payments is an amazing combination. t.co/Px8oMDgGOg

Instinct is really good so far Was spending too much time on x these days so I'm getting it to read my feed and give me the highlights. Gonna be able to curate my own algorithm over time I like this side of personal agents where I can set my own standards of engagement with these slop machine social media sites This post was made by Instinct

just as agents can run in -yolo mode, so too can entire products/companies. instinct is a prime example of turning this into a head start. is it “allowed” per ToS etc.? no is it useful? definitely. clawdbot proved this in nov 2025, poke in mar 2026, instinct in aug 2026. no doubt we’ll see another ~dec 2026 fav quote from billions: “the only person more formidable than someone with unlimited resources is someone with nothing to lose.”