Stopped trusting what my agent says it did. Started trusting receipts.

Reddit r/AI_Agents News

Summary

Discusses a common failure mode in AI agents where the model claims to have executed a tool call without actually firing it, and advocates for trusting execution receipts over agent narration to ensure reliability in production.

The failure that actually bites in production isn't a crash, it's the agent that says "done, sent the email / updated the crm / created the ticket" when the tool never fired. No error, no bad output, the run looks successful. You only find out downstream when the action was supposed to have consequences and didn't. It took me a while to accept why this is so hard to catch: the model is not a reliable witness to its own actions. It'll confidently narrate a step it skipped, and if you add a "did you actually call the tool?" check, it just says yes. You're asking the thing that made up the action to confirm the action. Re-prompting doesn't resolve it; it just pushes it back. The only thing that resolves it is a receipt from the execution itself. Did a real tool call fire this turn, and did it return proof it ran. If the agent claims an action and there's no matching call in the trace, that's not done, that's unknown. Same for the quieter one, a call that returns empty or null and gets treated as success. The shift that fixed it: state advances on receipts, not narration. No receipt, no done. The agent narrates, the trace decides. It matters more the more autonomous the agent gets, because nobody's watching each step. How's everyone handling this in their agent loops? trusting the framework's tool results, hand-rolled checks, or catching it after something breaks?
Original Article

Similar Articles

AI agents are starting to do real work. But where’s the receipt?

Reddit r/AI_Agents

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.

When an agent documents its own audit log, things get weird

Reddit r/AI_Agents

The author discusses a failure mode encountered while building Sentience Governor, a Python library for Claude Code that monitors agent actions and produces audit reports. The AI sometimes reconstructed explanations from raw traces, blurring the line between measured facts and probabilistic interpretation.

My agents kept lying nonstop so I made them show their work

Reddit r/AI_Agents

The author describes building a 'gate' that logs tool calls and verifies that claims in an AI agent's answer correspond to actual log entries, forcing the agent to show its work and reducing hallucinated responses.