# Do coding agents recommend Bing grounding? > Bing grounding was chosen in 2% of 499 judged AI search sessions, ranking number 11. Measured with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code. Source: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-bing-grounding Published: 2026-09-23 Publisher: Armature, Inc. (https://armature.tech) --- > Bing grounding was chosen in 2% of 499 judged AI search sessions, ranking number 11. It was also raised as a candidate in 26 further sessions without being chosen. This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in AI search inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Bing grounding. What an agent actually installed. ## The numbers | | | | --- | --- | | Category | AI search | | Sessions in the category | 499 | | Sessions where Bing grounding was chosen | 10 | | Install share | 2% | | Rank in category | 11 of 41 | | Codebases it won in | 2 | | Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 26 | | Chosen when considered | 28% | | Site | azure.microsoft.com | ## By agent With 10 wins spread across 5 agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established. | Agent | Sessions | Chose Bing grounding | Share | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Claude Code | 140 | 0 | 0% | | Codex | 144 | 2 | 1% | | Cursor | 136 | 5 | 4% | | Grok Build CLI | 35 | 1 | 3% | | Muse Code | 44 | 2 | 5% | ## By who was asking Bing grounding performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 0% to 6%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 23 of the 29 categories we measured. | Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Bing grounding | Share | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Vibe coder | 82 | 0 | 0% | | Junior developer | 173 | 0 | 0% | | Senior engineer | 124 | 7 | 6% | | Enterprise team | 120 | 3 | 3% | ## What Bing grounding was up against The full ranking in AI search, from the same sessions: | # | Product | Runs won | Share | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | Anthropic web search | 84 | 17% | | 2 | Brave Search API | 69 | 14% | | 3 | Exa | 67 | 13% | | 4 | Tavily | 42 | 8% | | 5 | OpenAI web search | 27 | 5% | | 6 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 24 | 5% | | 7 | Firecrawl | 23 | 5% | | 8 | NewsAPI.ai | 23 | 5% | ## What this means Bing grounding was raised in 26 sessions and chosen in 10. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough. ## Where these numbers come from The 499 sessions in AI search are part of a published set of 11,878, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: [how we measured this](/library/how-we-measured-this). Every AI search run can be replayed on [the board](/leaderboards/ai-search). If you work on Bing grounding: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts. ## Common questions ### Do coding agents recommend Bing grounding? Yes. Bing grounding was chosen in 10 of the 499 judged sessions in AI search, a 2% install share, ranking number 11 in its category. ### Does Claude Code recommend Bing grounding? In 0 of the 140 sessions in AI search run with Claude Code, which is 0%. ### Do different coding agents treat Bing grounding differently? Not much. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code chose it at similar rates, between 0% and 5% of their runs. ### How was this measured? Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 91 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind. ### How often is Bing grounding considered but not chosen? It was raised as a candidate in 26 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 10. That is a 28% conversion from considered to chosen. ## Read next - [How to get picked for AI search by coding agents](https://armature.tech/library/ai-search-coding-agents-playbook) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/ai-search-coding-agents-playbook.md) - [Do coding agents recommend Anthropic web search?](https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-anthropic-web-search) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-anthropic-web-search.md) - [Do coding agents recommend Brave Search API?](https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-brave-search-api) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-coding-agents-recommend-brave-search-api.md) - [Do Claude Code, Codex and Cursor pick the same tools?](https://armature.tech/library/do-claude-code-and-codex-agree) (Markdown: https://armature.tech/library/do-claude-code-and-codex-agree.md) --- Armature helps software products get discovered and used by coding agents. Service: https://armature.tech/discoverability · Results: https://armature.tech/leaderboards/sectors · Contact: contact@armature.tech