Knowledge & context
Which AI agent platforms ground their agents in your company data?
Just over half the index documents full grounding. Of 984 vendors, 519 publish evidence of ingesting documents, retrieving from company data, calling external knowledge APIs, running semantic search or exposing a retrieval layer. Another 358 document partial coverage and 107 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 984 public vendors on August 10, 2026.
How the 984 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 buyer can point the agent at their own content and have it retrieved at run time, with documented ingestion or a retrieval interface. Partial usually means a single connector, a fixed corpus the vendor controls, or grounding available only through a professional services engagement.
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 81 percent and data analyst agents follow at 75 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 33 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. UiPath, for enterprise operations agents
13.5 / 14Full enterprise operations agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
2. Automation Anywhere, for multi-agent platforms
13 / 14Full multi-agent platforms ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
3. NICE CXone, for customer support agents
13 / 14Full customer support agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
4. Salesforce, for GTM and revenue agents
13 / 14Full GTM and revenue agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
5. Agno, for agent infrastructure platforms
12.5 / 14Full agent infrastructure platforms ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
6. Appian, for agent builders
12.5 / 14Full agent builders ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
7. CrowdStrike, for security and SOC agents
12.5 / 14Full security and SOC agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
8. GitHub Copilot, for coding agents
12.5 / 14Full coding agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
9. Dataiku, for data analyst agents
12 / 14Full data analyst agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
10. Kubiya, for SRE and DevOps agents
12 / 14Full SRE and DevOps agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
11. Quiq, for voice agents
12 / 14Full voice agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
12. Innovaccer, for healthcare agents
11.5 / 14Full healthcare agents ranking · Compare the whole lane on all 14 axes
-
13. Island, for browser and computer-use agents
11 / 14Full browser and computer-use 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 |
|---|---|---|
| SRE and DevOps agents | 29 of 36 | 81% |
| data analyst agents | 50 of 67 | 75% |
| multi-agent platforms | 37 of 57 | 65% |
| GTM and revenue agents | 92 of 144 | 64% |
| customer support agents | 73 of 115 | 63% |
| enterprise operations agents | 202 of 319 | 63% |
| coding agents | 37 of 68 | 54% |
| agent builders | 58 of 114 | 51% |
| security and SOC agents | 44 of 92 | 48% |
| healthcare agents | 37 of 77 | 48% |
| voice agents | 29 of 88 | 33% |
| agent infrastructure platforms | 53 of 179 | 30% |
| browser and computer-use agents | 6 of 49 | 12% |
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.