Learn
How we choose Featured
Featured on bot.ski means a Botski staff pick — something we checked and recommend for people learning, planning, or playing with Grok Bot.
It is editorial only. Nobody can buy the Featured badge, a higher score, or a favorable review. If ads exist later, they will be labeled Sponsored and stay outside the staff score.
Opening a preview or reading a guide on this site does not install a bot. You use Grok Bot itself to set things up.
This Botski page is a first-draft guide to the Featured program.
When we publish a pick
We aim for one new Featured pick each Thursday at 10:00 a.m. America/Chicago, when a candidate clears the bar.
If nothing qualifies that week, we skip. The last real pick stays “Latest pick” with its original date — we do not invent a winner.
Thursday Arena (when it appears) is a nominated seed only. It has no staff score until we check it.
What we look for
A candidate should help visitors learn, plan, or play with Grok Bot (or a closely related skill explained clearly). Guides, shared templates, useful tools, and playable examples can qualify. A large following or fancy site is not required.
We need something visitors can actually try or read. Waitlist-only announcements do not qualify for Featured. Paid products can qualify when price, subscriptions, and limits are clear.
“Tested by Botski” appears only after a fresh setup and a second successful run of the intended job (for templates). We record device, date, and what access was needed. A public listing or a creator video alone does not count as our test.
Botski staff score (1–100)
Public label looks like: Botski staff score: 86/100 (example number only — not a rating of any live entry).
| Criterion | Max | What we check |
|---|---|---|
| Useful for the intended visitor | 30 | A clear, worthwhile result for someone learning, planning, or playing with Grok Bot |
| Works as described | 25 | The main promise holds up in our checks; important claims have sources |
| Easy to start | 20 | Clear next steps, visible access needs, reasonable setup |
| Clear costs and limits | 15 | Price, subscriptions, accounts, permissions, and creator identity are explained |
| Worth sharing | 10 | A useful teaching approach or distinctive example beyond the usual |
| Total | 100 | Staff judgment under this rubric — not a vote count |
Bands: 90–100 exceptional · 80–89 strong · 65–79 useful with limits · under 65 not Featured.
Featured also needs at least 18/25 on “works as described” and 10/15 on costs and limits. A broken main function, misleading credit, or hidden essential cost cannot be rescued by points elsewhere.
Scores are whole numbers from completed reviews. Unreviewed entries say Not yet reviewed — we do not invent a number. Clicks, likes, payment, and follower counts do not auto-score.
This score describes fit for bot.ski visitors. It is not a security certification, a popularity contest, or xAI approval.
What you should see on a pick
On the card: title and creator · one sentence why we chose it · Staff pick + score · Featured date and last-checked date · main price/access · a clear action (Read guide / View template / Try it).
On the detail page: what we tried, on which device, and when · score breakdown · one limitation and access needs · reviewer name and relevant disclosures · correction link and selection policy.
The written reason matters more than the number.
For third-party work we verified: By [creator] · Not made by Botski. Detail pages also say bot.ski is independent and this pick does not imply xAI endorsement. Botski-made work is labeled Made by Botski, not the third-party line.
Suggest something / fix something
You can nominate a resource or suggest a correction. Tell us the URL, who it helps, what to try, your relationship to it, and access or cost details. A screenshot helps for Featured candidates.
Use Suggest a listing to nominate a resource, or Contact to suggest a correction.
We promise an honest process — not guaranteed acceptance, exposure, or results.
What we avoid
- Selling Featured or the staff score
- Vote races that reward the loudest audience
- Treating fees or design polish as quality by themselves
- Mass thin pages with no original checks
- Keeping an old award live when the destination is broken or unsafe
Archives keep the historical pick (date, note, score). Current recommendations can be marked Unavailable or Needs review when things change.
First month (honest scope)
Evidence over volume: about 12–18 checked entries, three small collections, and at most four weekly picks when they deserve it.
Next
Sources
Fetched 2026-09-20 CT.
| Source | URL | Fetched | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Botski Featured program lock | Internal | 2026-09-20 CT | Editorial program rules, 2026-09-20 CT |
| Directory / Featured growth research KB | https://console.dev/selection-criteria | 2026-09-20 CT | Console-style criteria model |
| Official Grok Bot docs | https://docs.x.ai/grok-bot/ | 2026-09-20 CT | Product facts |