Are we calling too many workflows “agents”?
Summary
The author questions whether many so-called AI agents are better described as workflows, arguing that for repeatable browser tasks, defined workflows may be more reliable than agents that reinterpret steps each time.
Similar Articles
Can AI agents realistically automate complex workflows without human intervention?
A discussion about whether AI agents can reliably automate complex, multi-step workflows without constant human supervision, asking about current limitations and experiences.
AI agents are starting to expose how broken most workflows already were
The article argues that AI agents are revealing how unstructured and chaotic many corporate workflows actually are, suggesting that successful automation depends more on clean systems and documentation than on advanced models.
Everyone is selling AI agents, but almost nobody is selling the workflows to make them useful.
The article argues that while many are building and selling AI agents, the real value lies in the workflows and training that make them useful, not the underlying technology.
Should agents make recommendations based on the workflow rather than the product category?
This article discusses whether AI agents should base recommendations on workflow analysis rather than product category, emphasizing that users' true needs are workflow outcomes.
Where AI agents actually break in real workflows (not demos)
A discussion on where AI agents fail in real workflows, highlighting issues with coordination, reliability under messy inputs, and the challenge of reducing human intervention in production.