How reliable is Grok at quote-post attribution when summarizing an X discussion?

Suppose someone quotes a post saying “remote work hurts productivity” and adds, “This doesn’t match our team’s experience at all.”

In that example, the quoted claim and the person’s own position are opposites. I want a summary that keeps them separate, not one that attributes both statements to the person doing the quoting.

If I give Grok the quote-post URL, can I tell whether it has accessed both pieces of text? Would asking it to identify the original author, the quoted claim, and the added commentary make attribution easier to verify?

I’m especially interested in how people handle cases where the original post is unavailable. Does Grok clearly flag the missing context, or should I explicitly request that distinction every time?