What mechanisms are you using to distinguish "agent busy" from "task completed"?
Summary
This article discusses an anti-pattern in AI agent systems where agents appear busy but fail to complete tasks. The author suggests separating responsibilities and requiring proof of completion as a solution.
Similar Articles
How do you handle the 'verification gap' when an agent completes a long-running task?
Discusses the difficulty of verifying outputs from autonomous agents after long-running tasks and asks about using critic agents or traceability tools to ensure trustworthiness.
Agent followup and verification issues
A user describes the problem of AI agents not reporting back after being given tasks and asks the community for solutions and handling methods.
How do you catch when an AI agent skips something it was supposed to do?
A developer discusses challenges in detecting when AI agents silently skip actions, highlighting the difficulty of distinguishing legitimate omissions (e.g., policy blocks) from failures, and calls for collaboration on agent reliability tooling.
[Discussion] Do AI coding agents say “done” too early for you too?
Discussion about AI coding agents claiming completion prematurely, skipping checks, and making messy changes. The author is testing a system with planning and review gates to improve AI-coding workflows.
AI agents are starting to do real work. But where’s the receipt?
The article identifies a growing problem: AI agents can perform complex tasks, but their work is difficult to inspect, trust, and hand off. The author proposes a 'work receipt' system to provide transparent, shareable proof of what an agent did, including steps, sources, and confidence levels, aiming to help non-technical users confidently use agentic AI.