Knowledge & context
Which AI agent platforms ground their agents in your company data?
Just over half the index documents full grounding. Of 946 vendors, 522 publish evidence of ingesting documents, retrieving from company data, calling external knowledge APIs, running semantic search or exposing a retrieval layer. Another 309 document partial coverage and 115 document none.
Every vendor in the index is assessed against the same 14 point taxonomy from public documentation, and no vendor pays for placement. Counts on this page were measured across all 946 public vendors on September 30, 2026.
How the 946 vendors split
No public evidence means the reviewed sources did not document the capability. On this index that is a statement about the evidence, not proof that the capability is absent. See methodology.
What counts as full coverage
Full coverage means the vendor builds and maintains a retrieval structure over the buyer's own content, an index, a graph or an embeddings layer that persists, scales past the context window and stays queryable between runs, with documented ingestion. Partial means context assembled per run, however many sources it draws on, a single connector, a fixed corpus the vendor controls, or grounding available only through a professional services engagement. Persistence is the discriminator, not how many places the agent can read from.
How to read these numbers
This axis separates lanes by what the agent is for rather than by how good the vendor is. SRE and DevOps leads at 79 percent and data analyst agents follow at 73 percent, because both are useless without your runbooks or your warehouse. The browser and computer use lane sits at 12 percent, which is coherent rather than alarming: those agents get their context by looking at the screen. Voice at 34 percent is the number worth pausing on, since a phone agent with no grounded knowledge base is answering from a script, and that is a very different purchase from what the category name implies.
Leading platform for knowledge grounding & rag in each use case
Picked mechanically: the highest total coverage vendor in each lane that documents full evidence on this axis, one vendor per row. Scores are out of 14.
-
1. Appian, for enterprise operations agents
14 / 14Full enterprise operations agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
2. FLOWX.AI, for multi-agent platforms
14 / 14Full multi-agent platforms ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
3. Gumloop, for GTM and revenue agents
14 / 14Full GTM and revenue agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
4. Mastra, for agent infrastructure platforms
14 / 14Full agent infrastructure platforms ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
5. ServiceNow, for customer support agents
14 / 14Full customer support agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
6. UiPath, for agent builders
14 / 14Full agent builders ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
7. GitHub Copilot, for coding agents
13.5 / 14Full coding agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
8. Dataiku, for data analyst agents
13 / 14Full data analyst agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
9. HappyRobot, for voice agents
13 / 14Full voice agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
10. Adopt AI, for browser and computer-use agents
12.5 / 14Full browser and computer-use agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
11. Torq, for security and SOC agents
12.5 / 14Full security and SOC agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
12. Edge Delta, for SRE and DevOps agents
12 / 14Full SRE and DevOps agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
13. Innovaccer, for healthcare agents
11.5 / 14Full healthcare agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
Documented coverage by use case
Share of each lane documenting full coverage on this axis. Vendors that sit in two lanes count in both, the same rule the rankings and matrices use.
| Use case | Full coverage | Share |
|---|---|---|
| multi-agent platforms | 38 of 52 | 73% |
| data analyst agents | 42 of 59 | 71% |
| agent builders | 80 of 115 | 70% |
| GTM and revenue agents | 95 of 138 | 69% |
| customer support agents | 77 of 113 | 68% |
| enterprise operations agents | 200 of 297 | 67% |
| SRE and DevOps agents | 24 of 37 | 65% |
| security and SOC agents | 41 of 85 | 48% |
| voice agents | 36 of 83 | 43% |
| coding agents | 26 of 64 | 41% |
| healthcare agents | 24 of 69 | 35% |
| agent infrastructure platforms | 59 of 186 | 32% |
| browser and computer-use agents | 4 of 42 | 10% |
Recent verified changes from the vendors named above
Capability coverage is not a static picture. These are the most recent sourced change log entries for the platforms listed above, newest first, one per vendor. Scores on this page update as entries like these are verified.
-
Gumloop agent capability
Medium impactUsers can now text Gumball, Gumloop's personal agent, over iMessage, RCS or SMS to start a task, get replies in the same thread and approve steps by text. It is a public beta that admins can switch off by role.
September 29, 2026 · Partially Verified · All Gumloop changes
-
FLOWX.AI agent capability
High impactFlowX.AI 5.13.0 adds an AI agent to its Designer that surveys an existing app, drafts a plan from a plain language request, then builds or edits processes, screens, workflows and data types. It runs only after the builder confirms the plan and reviews each step, works on its own branch, and refuses destructive changes such as deleting a process with live instances.
September 28, 2026 · Verified · All FLOWX.AI changes
-
GitHub Copilot agent capability
Medium impactGitHub Copilot code review gained auto-resolution of review comments and updated analysis behavior, so the reviewing agent can close out its own findings rather than only reporting them.
September 11, 2026 · Verified · All GitHub Copilot changes
-
Mastra agent capability
Medium impactMastra introduced Filesystem Skills for Workspaces, enabling reusable skills for multi-agent systems.
September 11, 2026 · Verified · All Mastra changes
-
ServiceNow agent capability
High impactServiceNow introduced AI Specialists, a new agentic capability designed to autonomously handle end-to-end workflows such as incident resolution. The first generally available specialist, the L1 Service Desk AI Specialist, can triage incidents, diagnose issues, apply fixes, and communicate with requesters. It operates in either an autonomous Autopilot mode or a human-in-the-loop Copilot mode.
September 4, 2026 · Verified · All ServiceNow changes
Full change log · updated weekly across the whole index
Questions buyers ask
Does RAG coverage mean the vendor hosts my documents?
Not necessarily. Some vendors ingest and store content, others retrieve from a system you already run. Where the data sits is graded on the deployment and data residency axis, which is the one that matters for residency questions.
Is grounding the same as memory?
No. Grounding is retrieval from a knowledge source. Memory is persistence of context across runs and conversations, graded separately, and it is far scarcer across the index.
Why would a strong platform score partial here?
Usually because it is not a knowledge product. Coding and browser agents get context from the repository or the page, so partial grounding coverage can be an accurate description of a well built tool.
The other 13 axes
No single axis decides a shortlist. Buyers who care about this one usually check workflow orchestration and human oversight & guardrails next, or open the full taxonomy to see how the 14 axes fit together.