In Silicon Valley, there’s growing enthusiasm about the potential of AI agents. Figures like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman have stated that AI agents will “join the workforce” in the near future. Microsoft’s Satya Nadella predicts that these agents will replace certain knowledge-based roles, and Salesforce’s Marc Benioff aspires for the company to lead the world in “digital labor” via its agent-driven services.
However, there’s a major challenge: no one seems to agree on what constitutes an AI agent.
The tech industry has been quick to champion AI agents as the next big thing, claiming they’ll revolutionize how we work, similar to how AI chatbots like ChatGPT reshaped information retrieval. CEOs like Altman and Nadella believe agents will significantly change business operations, but the term “agent” itself remains highly ambiguous.
Much like other tech buzzwords such as “AGI” and “multimodal,” the term “agent” risks becoming so overused that it loses its meaning. This poses a dilemma for companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, Salesforce, Amazon, and Google, all of which are developing their own “agent” products — but with vastly different interpretations of what an agent actually is.
Ryan Salva, a senior director at Google, has expressed frustration with the term. He believes the industry has overused “agent” to the point where it has lost its clarity. Salva even said he’s grown to “hate” the word.
The issue isn’t new. Last year, former TechCrunch reporter Ron Miller questioned the very definition of an AI agent, noting that every company approaches it differently. The problem has only deepened with time.
OpenAI, for instance, has defined agents in two ways: as “automated systems that can independently accomplish tasks on behalf of users,” and as “LLMs equipped with instructions and tools.” Leher Pathak from OpenAI later suggested that “assistants” and “agents” might be interchangeable terms, adding more confusion.
Meanwhile, Microsoft distinguishes between AI assistants and agents. The former helps with general tasks, while the latter is tailored for specific roles, offering specialized expertise.
AI research lab Anthropic presents a more flexible approach, defining agents in a range of ways. This includes both fully autonomous systems and prescriptive tools that follow predefined workflows.
Salesforce offers an even broader definition, describing agents as systems capable of understanding and responding to customer queries without human intervention. The company’s platform even categorizes agents into types, from simple reflex agents to more complex utility-based agents.
So, why the confusion?
AI agents, much like AI itself, are still evolving rapidly, making them hard to pin down. OpenAI, Google, and Perplexity have all introduced their first AI agents, but these products vary greatly in terms of what they can actually do.
Rich Villars from IDC pointed out that tech companies have a history of not adhering strictly to technical definitions. They tend to focus more on achieving technical goals in fast-moving markets than on defining terms precisely.
Marketing also plays a significant role in the muddled use of “agents,” according to Andrew Ng, the founder of DeepLearning.ai. He noted that big companies have driven the shift in how AI “agents” and “agentic” workflows are used, turning a technical term into a marketing buzzword.
The lack of a unified definition presents both an opportunity and a challenge. Jim Rowan from Deloitte explains that the ambiguity allows companies to tailor agents to their specific needs. However, it can also lead to “misaligned expectations” and difficulties in evaluating ROI from agent-related projects.
Without a clear standard for what AI agents are, companies might struggle to measure success, making it harder to meet project goals or assess the real value of these technologies. Though flexibility allows for creative solutions, a more defined understanding of AI agents would help organizations maximize their investments and align their expectations.
Given the ongoing confusion around terms like “AI” itself, it seems unlikely that the tech industry will ever settle on a single, clear definition of what constitutes an AI agent.
