A fundamental problem with extending Codex/Cowork/Code to all knowledge work is that they remain very "software-brained" where the end result （the software） is what is important & that code serves as a source of truth.

For a lot of other knowledge work， the process is at least as important as the outcome. This includes researching what is known， an exploration of alternatives， failed efforts， prototype branches， experiments， etc. All of those things are valuable， so you cannot use the PowerPoint at the end the way you can use a codebase， nor is progress on a to-do list sufficient context post compaction. You work in learning loops， refining your perspectives as you go.

In some ways， this makes long-running models like Fable hard to use for deep knowledge work， since they are designed to deliver product to you in the end. You can prompt your way around this problem， but everything about the Codex and Code harnesses want you to be a software developer and you have to fight them. There is a real disconnect between how a manager or analyst thinks about problems and how the agentic software tools approach solving them. Addressing this is critical to breaking out of the coding niche for these tools.