Anyone else talking clients OUT of building an agent more often than into it?

Been doing client work in this space for a while now and noticed a pattern I don't see discussed much. Most inbound requests start with "we need an AI agent for X." But when I actually dig into what's happening today, most of the time there's no documented process behind X at all. It's a person doing it ad hoc, or three disconnected tools, or a handoff that only works because one employee remembers to check something. Building an agent on top of that doesn't solve the problem. It just adds a layer of automation on top of chaos, and then the whole thing gets blamed when it breaks, even though the actual root cause was never the AI. So lately my first real question on any discovery call isn't about the agent at all. It's "walk me through exactly what happens today, step by step, no tools." If they can't answer that clearly, I tell them straight up that a documented process needs to come first, not an agent. Half the time that means recommending something way simpler than what they came in asking for. Sometimes it means no build at all yet. Is this just me, or is everyone else running into the same thing? Feels like "agent" has become the default word people reach for even when what they actually need is way more boring than that.