Choosing tools

Glean, Claude Cowork, or ParkWalk?

Nearly everyone who evaluates ParkWalk asks how it compares to these two. Fair question. All three get called "AI for work," and all three mean something different by it. This is the answer we give on sales calls, including the parts where we point you at the other two.

Updated July 2026
The short answer

What each one is for

Glean

Search across everything your company knows

Glean connects to your systems, indexes what's in them, and answers questions with the right context, respecting who's allowed to see what. It has an agent builder too, and the agents are getting more capable. But the reason companies buy Glean is the index: past a certain size, nobody can find anything, and Glean fixes that.

Built aroundthe company index
You mostlyask questions
Buy it whennobody can find anything
Claude Cowork

Claude, working on whatever you hand it

Cowork is an assistant in the plainest sense. Describe what you need and Claude goes off and does it: drafts, research, spreadsheets, files. It keeps working after you close your laptop and asks your phone when it's stuck. There's nothing to set up, which is exactly why people love it.

Built arounda session with Claude
You mostlyhand it tasks
Buy it wheneveryone is stretched thin
ParkWalk

Workflows you design, agents run without you

ParkWalk is for work you can write down. Lay it out once as a workflow: the steps, the quality checks, what the agent may touch, when it should ask a person. Agents run it while you're away, once, on a schedule, or continuously through a loop that owns a goal. Plan an afternoon to build your first task.

Built aroundworkflows your team designs
You mostlydesign, then review
Buy it whenwork should run without you
The difference underneath

You ask Glean. You pair with Cowork. You delegate to ParkWalk.

Strip away the branding and the three products assume three different working relationships.

Glean assumes you have a question. It knows what your company knows, and its job is to answer with sources. Cowork assumes you have a task, right now. Claude works on it while you do something else, and you check the result yourself, because you're the one who needs it. ParkWalk assumes the work has a shape. You draw it as a workflow: the steps, the checks, the points where a person decides. Agents run inside those lines, and a person signs off on whatever comes back.

The first two make your team faster at what it already does, and they pay off the day you install them. ParkWalk pays off slower. Someone has to sit down and turn "how we do this" into something an agent can run, and until they do, nothing happens by itself. Once they have, the work runs with nobody doing it.

In practice

Who should buy what

Glean

You ask

You're new at a 4,000-person company. The answer you need exists, split between a deck from 2024, a Slack thread, and a policy doc, and you have no idea where. That moment is Glean's whole business: one search over everything, that respects who's allowed to see what.

  • Answers scattered across dozens of systems
  • Getting new people up to speed
  • Feeding company context to other AI tools over MCP
  • The company-wide fix for "where does anything live"
Where it stops: Glean's agents can take some actions now, but most of its connectors read rather than write. If what you need is work finished in Salesforce or Stripe, not an answer about them, the index alone won't get you there.

Claude Cowork

You pair

It's 2pm. The board deck is due, three analyses are untouched, and there's a contract to summarize. You give Claude each one in a sentence, go to your meeting, and come back to drafts. Nothing was set up beforehand, and nothing needs to exist tomorrow.

  • One-off work you can describe in a sentence
  • Drafts, research, analysis you'll check yourself
  • Back-and-forth on creative work
  • Teams that already pay for Claude
Where it stops: anything that's become a process. Work that lives in one person's chat sessions runs differently every time, and nobody else can see it, improve it, or audit it. Checking your own agent's output sounds fine until the tenth run, when you stop reading and start clicking approve.

ParkWalk

You delegate

Billing review eats a morning of your team's time, and last quarter someone approved a refund they shouldn't have. An ops lead spends an afternoon writing the task down: what to pull, what counts as normal, what the agent can do alone (credits under $500) and what it can't (refunds, ever). The review is now two questions on a phone and a fifteen-minute verdict. Later, when nobody thinks about it anymore, a loop takes over the goal itself: keep receivables clean, inside a budget, report back.

  • Work you can write down as steps and checks
  • Work that touches money, customers, or production data
  • Work a manager or an auditor has to trust
  • Standing goals a loop can own, like collections or pipeline hygiene
Where it stops: work you can't write down yet. Exploration, drafting, figuring out what you think. That's improvisation, and improvisation is what Cowork is for. Come here when the work has a shape.
Tasks, walks, loops

Delegate it once, on a schedule, or for good

Recurrence isn't what makes work delegable. Structure is. It just happens that structure pays back fastest on work that repeats.

Once

Some work justifies design even though it runs once. A migration, a quarter-end close, an audit response. Build the task, run it in a walk, review the result. Approved means done, and ParkWalk retires the task.

On a schedule

Billing review, CRM hygiene, queue triage. The same versioned workflow runs on its schedule, and your team's part shrinks to check-ins and verdicts.

Ongoing, with a loop

A loop owns an open goal, like keeping receivables clean. It plans and runs tasks toward that goal week after week, inside a budget you cap, and you steer it in chat. The goal stays. The tasks change.

The point

Faster at your desk isn't time back

Every product on this page will tell you it makes your team more productive. It's worth being precise about what that means.

Acceleration tools supercharge the working session: you produce more in the hours you're at the screen, and Cowork does this well. But watch what happens to those hours. They fill back up. The deck gets three more revisions, the backlog finds you, and a decade of productivity software has made everyone faster without making anyone less busy.

ParkWalk is built on a different bet: time comes back when a process moves to the background, not when the foreground gets faster. Walks run while you're in a meeting, at lunch, or actually in the park. Your part fits on a phone: a decision here, a verdict there. We named the company after that moment. Everything else on this page, the structure, the rails, the check-ins, exists to make being away safe.

So "productive" here doesn't mean you produced more. It means the work got done and you weren't there.

The rails

If you don't want your team watching a stream

Most agent products assume somebody is sitting there: watching output scroll past, ready to grab the wheel. For pairing, that's the right design. As a way to run a team, it falls apart. Nobody supervises forty streams at once, and "someone was watching" won't satisfy your auditor.

If people are going to walk away while agents work, the safety has to live in the system, and it has to be in place before the run starts. In ParkWalk that means five things:

  • The task is written down. Versioned, owned by the team, and the same on run forty as on run one.
  • Permissions are set before the run. The agent gets the narrowest grant that does the job, and the risky actions are gated by the platform, not by the prompt.
  • Check-ins are questions, not transcripts. When the agent needs you, your phone gets a decision with options, and the rest of the walk keeps moving.
  • Results wait for a verdict. Approve it, send it back with notes, or dismiss it. Nothing counts until someone signs.
  • Everything leaves a trace. Every action, every model call, every dollar, all attributable later.
SupervisingYou're present
Pairing: you are the safety mechanism. Works fine, right up until you look away.
DelegatingYou're on a walk
Check-in · task-2042m ago
Acme Widgets' invoice is 22% over last month. Approve, hold, or send it back?
Approve $4,210Hold for nowSend back
Weekly billing review
4/4 steps · trace available
Ready for review
Delegating: the system is the safety mechanism. You get the decisions; the trace gets everything else.

The first week feels slower

Cowork meets your team where it is. ParkWalk asks your team to work differently: you prepare work for agents instead of doing work with one. Most of that first week goes to writing down process that has only ever lived in people's heads.

What comes back is a different kind of win. Not hours saved, but a morning that stops existing on anyone's calendar. If nothing on your plate feels worth writing down yet, start with Cowork. Come back when something does.

Side by side

The same questions, asked of all three

Pricing shifts often enough that we've kept those rows loose. Check each vendor for current numbers.

GleanYou ask Claude CoworkYou pair ParkWalkYou delegate
Built around A permission-aware index of company knowledge A working session with a capable general agent A workflow your team designs, versions, and owns
How work starts You ask a question, or trigger an agent someone built You describe what you need, in the moment You press start, a schedule fires, or a loop decides it's next
Ongoing goals Agents run when triggered or scheduled Scheduled tasks re-run a prompt Loops hold a goal, choose the tasks, and report back, inside a budget
Where work is defined In the prompt, or in the agent builder In conversation, per session Up front, as a versioned workflow with check-in rules
Your role while it runs Reading and judging answers Available: steering, unblocking, checking as it goes Away. It reaches your phone when it needs a decision
Quality control You evaluate what it returns You check the output, because you asked for it Check-ins you defined, then a required verdict: approve, send back, or dismiss
What comes back Answers, drafts, and agent outputs with sources Drafts, files, analyses, plus actions in connected tools A reviewable result with a trace of every action taken
Permissions Retrieval mirrors your existing document permissions; admins govern content and agents Org-level connector and spend controls; within a session, trust rides on the person running it Per-role scope ceilings, approval gates on risky actions, and budgets, enforced at execution
Models Many LLMs, bring your own model keys Claude Claude, GPT, the ParkWalk fleet, or your own models and keys, with per-team budgets
How teams share it A company agent library on a shared index Skills and plugins share capability; sessions stay personal A versioned task library; the process itself is what gets shared
Buying motion Enterprise sale, custom quote, seats plus consumption credits Self-serve, per-seat, bundled with a Claude subscription Free to start, per-seat, cheaper when you bring your own model keys
Best first win "Anyone can find anything" "Working sessions, supercharged" "A process moves to the background"
Using them together

How they fit together

Different jobs, and they connect in useful ways. Plenty of teams will end up running two of the three.

ParkWalk runs on Claude

Bring your own Anthropic or OpenAI key and ParkWalk orchestrates on it. You pay less, and your data terms stay with your model vendor. The split most teams land on: Cowork for the in-the-moment work, ParkWalk for anything that's become a process.

Glean knows, ParkWalk does

Glean's MCP server can feed permission-aware company context into a ParkWalk task, and the results land back in the systems Glean indexes. If you already run Glean, ParkWalk doesn't replace it. It gives the knowledge somewhere to go.

MCP, in both directions

ParkWalk uses MCP servers as connectors and exposes one of its own, so Claude Code and Cowork can start walks and pull results. ParkWalk's permissions stay in force no matter which agent is asking.

Deciding

Three questions to ask about any piece of work

Can you write down how it should go?

If you can name the steps and what good looks like, an agent can run it inside them. If you can't yet, it isn't delegation work.

Does it touch systems of record?

Money moved, customers contacted, records changed. The stakes are what make rails worth having.

Does someone else have to trust it?

If a manager or an auditor relies on the result, "I checked it myself" stops working.

No on all three: that's improvisation, use Cowork and enjoy the afternoon. Stuck before you can even start because nothing is findable: that's Glean. Two or three yeses: write it down in ParkWalk. And if the yeses describe a standing goal rather than a single piece of work, that's a loop.

Start with one process

Pick the process your team most dreads. Write it down once, scope it tight, and see whether you trust what comes back. Then spend that time somewhere better.

Free for small teams · cheaper on your own model keys · SSO, SCIM and audit built in