Choosing Hark Pro or Muse by connected accounts

Hark Pro suits a first trial of custom mini-apps for everyday tasks. Meta Muse has a stronger documented case when the job needs WhatsApp or named business connectors.

As of October 6, 2026, we'd choose between them by the accounts a task needs, then inspect usage and approvals. We haven't run matching tasks in either product.

Their launch promises don't establish which one makes fewer mistakes. A browser-model benchmark can't settle that question.

The accounts your task needs decide the first trial

Hark's launch article describes Panels, which are custom mini-apps built around a task or connected account. Its examples include Strava activity, Netflix recommendations, and ParentSquare grades. Action Buttons offer suggested actions, such as paying a bill or canceling a subscription. Those examples describe the product's intended use. They aren't results from our testing.

Muse can talk through WhatsApp as well as its own app. Its September 29 small-business announcement names Shopify, QuickBooks, Slack, Stripe, and Notion connectors, alongside Facebook and Instagram business accounts. That gives a shop owner a concrete list to check against their existing tools. The actual connector list is in Muse's app settings.

Suppose the job is to review a shop's recent sales and prepare a proposed promotion. We'd inspect Muse first because Meta names the storefront, accounting, and social-account connections that job could need. We'd still require source links for the sales figures and approval before publishing. If the required account isn't supported or its permissions are unsuitable, the documented connector list doesn't rescue the fit.

For a family or personal task organized around a custom interface, we'd inspect Hark first. A useful Panel must expose the information you need and make its next action clear. Muse can also build tools, so custom tools alone don't establish an exclusive Hark advantage. Muse design.

Table 1 Download CSV

Check before connecting accounts	Hark Pro	Meta Muse
Reusable work	Panels, Action Buttons, and Scheduled Tasks. Guide	Goals, background work, and tools it builds for a task. Design
Documented app connections	Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 APIs; MCP integrations. Guide, launch	WhatsApp for conversation; named consumer and business connectors. Business tools
Access condition	Adults 18 and older; a complete geographic eligibility list isn't established here. Terms	US and Canada; subscriptions remain subject to account and regional availability. Current markets, subscription access
Displayed monthly prices	Free; Pro² at $20 for 2× usage; Pro³ at $100 for 10× usage. Pricing	Free; Power at $20 for 500 million Muse tokens weekly; Maximum at $100 for 3 billion weekly. Plans
What remains unmeasured	Completed tasks, failure rate, and cost per successful job	Completed tasks, failure rate, and cost per successful job

Our personal-agent comparison covers other products. Dots versus Grok Bot addresses subscription eligibility and computer access.

Matching monthly prices don't mean matching capacity

Hark's pricing page says the free version has the full feature set and paid plans increase usage. Its multipliers don't specify a task count or reset period in the reviewed page. Pro² therefore can't be translated into a fixed number of errands per week.

Meta publishes a different meter. Its subscription guide gives Power 500 million Muse tokens per week and Maximum 3 billion. Benefits and availability can vary by account and region, so onboarding is the place to confirm your offer. The free tier has a limit and refreshes; the guide doesn't give its numeric allowance.

Neither source supplies a common unit for comparing completed work.

Muse tokens aren't established here as equivalent to API input or output tokens. Hark's 2× usage isn't a quantity that can be divided into Meta's weekly allowance. Both sources display $ without specifying currency. Those labels don't establish a value ranking. Check currency, taxes, and billing route in checkout before paying.

Start with a task whose result you can inspect, and record the account's usage before and after. If the result is useful, repeat the same job to see how much work your allowance supports. Buying more capacity makes sense after an actual limit blocks useful work. It won't repair a missing connection or an approval setting that doesn't fit the task.

Approval settings change what you're handing over

Hark's terms allow standing permissions for transactions and say default purchase confirmation can be overridden. Don't infer from an Action Button that each purchase will require a fresh confirmation. Read the permission you grant and inspect which future transactions it covers.

Muse's security description gives Sentinel, a separate permission system, authority over connector actions and network access. Grants can last for one action, a task, a session, a period, or indefinitely. Meta separately says purchases require approval each time. We haven't tested whether either product applies its documented controls correctly on difficult tasks.

Privacy needs a separate check. Hark's vault describes credential protection. That doesn't establish that every message and task artifact is inaccessible to the provider. Meta says the current Muse VM permits necessary operational access. Its cryptographic Confidential VM is described as forthcoming. Current Muse architecture.

Meta uses sanitized conversations and tool trajectories for training by default, with an opt-out. Hark's terms permit improvement use and safety or compliance training even after an opt-out. Inspect those choices before sharing sensitive material. Meta data use, Hark terms.

Our Hark Handoff page and agent benchmark results answer narrower questions about evaluated models. They don't measure these permissions or a complete Hark-versus-Muse workflow.

A useful first job is to read an approved calendar, identify conflicts, and return a proposed correction with source links. Leave editing and messaging outside that initial permission. This is a suggested evaluation, not a test we've run. Compare the result, the actions taken, the approval requests, and the usage consumed. Only then decide which additional responsibility the agent has earned.

Questions

Is Hark Pro the same thing as Hark Handoff?

Hark Pro is the personal-agent product, including memory, scheduled work, Panels, and Action Buttons. Hark Handoff is its browser-use model. A Handoff benchmark result measures the evaluated browser component under that test's conditions. It does not establish how well the complete Hark Pro product manages permissions, remembers preferences, or finishes everyday errands.

Do I need a Facebook account to subscribe to Muse?

Muse subscriptions require a Meta account. Meta's subscription help says you can create that account using Facebook, Instagram, or an email address or phone number. A Facebook account is therefore not the only route. You must also meet the subscription's age and location requirements, and check the benefits offered during onboarding.

Can either agent keep working after I close the app?

Hark documents Scheduled Tasks for recurring work, while Meta describes Muse as working in the background on its own cloud computer. Closing the interface is different from completing a task successfully. Check the account's remaining usage, required connections, and pending approvals before relying on either product to finish work unattended.