Meta says Muse took seven months to ship, with fewer than 200 core staff and a 100-plus test gate

Meta says Muse took seven months to ship, with fewer than 200 core staff and a 100-plus test gate

N
News Editor
2026-10-12 03:45:13
Meta Chief AI Officer Alexandr Wang has outlined how the company built Muse, a personal AI agent designed to handle tasks for users. According to Wang, the product moved from prototype to launch in seven months, with a core model and product team of fewer than 200 people. He said Meta chose to focus on personal agents even as Anthropic was seen as far ahead in coding agents earlier this year. Wang and Meta AI product head Nat Friedman believed Meta’s advantage lay in building AI products for mainstream users across its apps, which Wang said reach about 3.5 billion people daily. After both executives tested OpenClaw in depth in February, they submitted memos to Meta’s board. One memo from Friedman, titled Trust Is a Must, argued that personal agents had to earn user trust. The team then produced a Muse prototype within one to two weeks, but the early product was unstable. Over the following months, Meta defined more than 100 required capabilities and built tests for each one. Some model versions passed about 80 tests, but failed roughly 20, delaying release until the specially trained Muse Spark 1.3 cleared the full evaluation set.

Meta Chief AI Officer Alexandr Wang said in a recent interview that Muse, the company’s personal AI agent built to carry out tasks for users, took seven months to move from prototype to release. The core team handling the model and product had fewer than 200 people.

Meta backed personal agents over coding agents

Wang said that earlier this year, Anthropic was well ahead in coding agents, and many in the industry saw programming as the most important application for advanced AI. He and former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman, now Meta’s head of AI products, took a different view and placed more weight on personal agents.

Wang said Meta’s apps are used by about 3.5 billion people every day, and argued that building AI products for ordinary users fits the company’s strengths better. He added that Meta had already laid out its "personal superintelligence" direction in 2025, while OpenClaw gave that idea a more concrete product form.

OpenClaw led to the first Muse prototype

In February, after spending time with OpenClaw, Wang and Friedman each sent memos to Meta’s board. Friedman wrote two. One was titled Trust Is a Must and argued that a personal agent had to win user trust.

The team then built a Muse prototype in one to two weeks. Early versions already included the mascot Jolly and a first concept for the dedicated hardware device Muse Charm. Even so, the product was unstable at that stage. It could occasionally impress, but most of the time it still struggled with basic tasks.

Release came only after more than 100 tests were cleared

Over the next few months, the team kept tuning the model. Meta drew up a list of more than 100 required capabilities, designed tests for each one, and used those results as its launch threshold.

Wang said some model versions were able to pass about 80 of the tests, but still failed roughly 20, which meant more training was needed. Muse was not released until the specially trained Muse Spark 1.3 passed the full evaluation set.

A top product for the year, without a big hiring push

Meta leadership viewed Muse as one of the company’s most important products of the year, but did not aggressively expand the development team. Wang said products inside large companies can easily turn into a mix of too many people’s ideas, with each product manager trying to add something, until the result becomes a patchwork.

He said Muse was designed from the start to preserve a unified product experience, with Friedman leading that effort. Wang added that his AI research organization follows a similarly lean structure.

Wang described a flat research management model

Wang said he currently has more than 200 direct reports. Researchers on the TBD team report to him directly, without multiple layers of people-management roles in between. Individual groups still have technical leads, who decide the technical direction.

He also said he is not necessarily the best manager for all 200-plus people, but argued that the researchers have already proven what they can do and do not need close supervision on every matter. In his view, giving them enough resources and freedom matters more.

This article was originally published by Bit.Fan. For more cryptocurrency news and market insights, visit www.bit.fan.
300

Disclaimer:

The market information, project data, and third-party content displayed on this platform are for industry information sharing only and do not constitute any form of investment advice or return commitment.

Cryptocurrency trading carries high risks. Users should fully assess their risk tolerance and make independent decisions. All profits, losses, and legal responsibilities are borne by the users themselves.