Which stores block which AI shopping agents

The log

Status means what a named source supports on the date in the row. It does not mean we completed a purchase.

What Amazon said, and what Meta said

The Verge's account of the Amazon statement is specific. Meta did not notify Amazon that Muse would shop the store. Amazon objected that Muse does not identify itself as an agent while it browses, and said the agent appears to capture customer credentials. The spokesperson's line, given to GeekWire and quoted by The Verge: third-party applications that buy on behalf of customers "should operate openly and respect service provider decisions about whether or not to participate."

Bloomberg's September 22 story names the spokesperson, Lara Hendrickson, and adds the outcome The Verge did not have yet. Amazon asked Meta to remove Amazon from Muse. Meta declined. The block started Sunday night, September 20. Hendrickson said an opt-in is already how food-delivery apps and online travel agencies work, and that agentic apps have the same obligation. Meta had not replied to Bloomberg's email. That is a refusal of the removal request, not a published Meta statement about credentials. The credential dispute stays unresolved.

Meta's launch position, which this directory already uses on the Muse listing, is narrower: Muse cannot see passwords or payment details. The Verge notes that claim and also notes that its own tester had completed an Amazon purchase with Muse before the block. Those sentences can all be true at different times. This page does not pick a winner on the credential allegation. It records that Amazon is refusing the session.

PCMag's September 21 writeup matches the popup wording and the September 20 start. It also says Amazon took similar steps against agentic shopping in ChatGPT and Gemini in 2025. "Similar" without a current status is how a table gets a false row. Those agents stay off this log until a page we fetch states a block or an allow.

Comet is a lawsuit, not a green light

The Ninth Circuit opinion of August 4, 2026 (No. 26-1444) vacated a preliminary injunction Amazon had won against Perplexity. The panel's point was statutory: on the facts in front of it, the user was the one accessing Amazon, with Comet as the tool, so Amazon was unlikely to prove that Perplexity "accessed" Amazon's computers under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or California's CDAFA. The injunction was vacated and the case remanded.

Read that narrowly. The opinion does not say Amazon's conditions of use are void. It does not say Comet checkout works today. It says Amazon was not entitled to that injunction on those statutes. The district case (No. 3:25-cv-09514) continues. Anyone telling you "Comet won Amazon" is ahead of the docket.

Comet's separate prompt-injection history (Brave, August 2025) is a security fact about the browser, not an access row. It lives on the shopping guide, not in this table.

What this log refuses to do

• It will not mark a store "open" because an agent worked once in a reviewer's test. The Verge's tank-top purchase happened before the Muse block. The row is the block.
• It will not treat Wizard's Best Buy partnership as a universal cart. Amazon, Walmart, and Target are not on Wizard's named native-checkout list.
• It will not add a row from a paraphrase. If the source does not name the store, the agent, and a status, the cell stays blank.
• It is not legal advice. The Comet line is a description of a public opinion, not a prediction of the remand.

Where to go next

Shoppers comparing the products: best AI shopping agents. Merchants who do not install Muse on Shopify: best agentic commerce tools. The category counts behind both pages are in AI agents software statistics.

The next edit of this log is a new row or a changed status, with a date and a source. It is not a fresh top 10.