word-GPT-Plus
Word GPT Plus is a word add-in which integrates the AI&Agent into Microsoft Word.
Runs with mockssource: GitHubTypeScriptMITcommit 065e25ebd2a0
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: ai, chatgpt, copilot, office, office365, openai and word.
word-GPT-Plus runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 3 minutes and hit 4 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
After installing Node 24.21.0 and pnpm 12.11.2, `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile`, `pnpm build`, and `pnpm check` all pass, `pnpm serve` answered 200 on port 3000, and the app's LangChain chat and agent flows completed against a local Ollama-compatible mock.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 92 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- Backgrounded mock HTTP servers (nohup & subshell) were reaped by the exec harness after the parent shell exited, causing ECONNREFUSED on 127.0.0.1:114345 minutes
- System Node.js 18.19.1 failed the pinned-toolchain preinstall (project requires Node 24.21.0 / pnpm 12.11.2)3 minutes
- Harness-only bug: my in-memory checkpoint saver encoded bytes as JSON strings, breaking the real JsonPlusSerializer loadsTyped during agent putWrites2 minutes
- Temporary probe artifacts made `pnpm format:check` report style issues1 minute
- Install time
- 3 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 31 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 4 hit, 4 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- curl -s -o /dev/null -w %{http_code} http://localhost:3000/ returned 200 (also 200 for the app JS/CSS assets); all five stages of `pnpm check` exited 0; `pnpm build` exited 0 (4228 modules); app chat flow against mock streamed 'mock reply to: hello mock' and agent flow stepped ['HumanMessage','HumanMessage|AIMessage'] with 10 POST /api/chat hits in the mock log
- Model tokens used
- 3,297,708
- Exact commit tested
- 065e25ebd2a0
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
- Behaviour against real services
- this run was verified against stand-in services only
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
- Check suite: `pnpm check` → prettier/eslint/stylelint/vue-tsc/dpdm all passed - Launch: `pnpm serve` → `vite preview` on `http://localhost:3000/`; `curl` returned `200` for `/`,… - Behavior (tier2, against a local Ollama-compatible mock): the app's real LangChain chat flow stre… - No real credentials: all providers (Argusic/Azure/Groq/Gemini) would need real API keys; Ollama p… exec /bin/sh -lc 'echo "ELAPSED_CHECK: started 16:30, now $(date -u +%H:%M:%S)"' in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: ELAPSED_CHECK: started 16:30, now 17:00:42 2026-10-14T17:00:53.124756Z ERROR codex_core::session: failed to record rollout items: thread 01a13… 2026-10-14T17:00:53.124919Z ERROR codex_core::session: failed to record rollout items: thread 01a13… tokens used 3,297,708
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Installed in 3 minutes, faster than the median of the 151 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Recovered from all 4 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Only reached a running state against stand-in services, so nothing here proves it works against the real ones.
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
Of the 152 ai projects Argusic has installed and timed, word-GPT-Plus was the 46th fastest to reach a running state, and 99 of 152 reached one at all.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Runs with mocks | 92.00 | 0.69 |
Topics (from GitHub)
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/word-gpt-plus)Questions
- Does word-GPT-Plus run?
- word-GPT-Plus runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 3 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test word-GPT-Plus?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 065e25ebd2a0. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test word-GPT-Plus?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.69: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does word-GPT-Plus take to install?
- 3 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does word-GPT-Plus need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing word-GPT-Plus?
- 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does word-GPT-Plus compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 152 ai projects Argusic has installed and timed, word-GPT-Plus was the 46th fastest to reach a running state, and 99 of 152 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for word-GPT-Plus?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.