
What Is AI Agent Washing, And Why Is It Everywhere?
Every week, I see new headlines about 'autonomous AI,' 'self-directed agents,' and 'intelligent coworkers.' As someone who's spent years building automation tools, I understand the excitement—some of those headlines are even written by me.
The promise of AI agents—tools that can plan, reason, and act independently—is genuinely game-changing. But not everything labeled an 'agent' actually lives up to the name.
More and more, I'm noticing a trend that feels uncomfortably familiar from past tech booms: companies rushing to call their simple chatbots or task automations 'agents,' when in reality, they're little more than rebranded scripts. This practice is called 'agent washing,' and while it may help companies ride the current hype cycle, it comes at a cost—it confuses users, disappoints customers, and gums up the process of adopting tools that are genuinely transformative.
Here's how to recognize agent washing and why it matters.
What Is Agent Washing?
A new report from Gartner throws cold water on the agent craze, estimating that only about 130 of the thousands of existing agentic AI vendors are legit.
'Most agentic AI projects right now are early-stage experiments or proof of concepts that are mostly driven by hype and are often misapplied,' said Anushree Verma, a Senior Director Analyst at Gartner. 'This can blind organizations to the real cost and complexity of deploying AI agents at scale, stalling projects from moving into production.'
Some companies are compounding the problem through agent washing, which involves rebranding existing products like AI assistants and chatbots without 'substantial agentic capabilities.'
When that line is blurred—whether to attract attention, funding, or users—it has the effect of creating confusion and eroding trust. Users expect the intelligence and autonomy that the word 'agent' implies, and when that expectation isn't met, it reflects poorly on the product and the brand. Worse still, it can stall meaningful progress by flooding the market with inflated claims and underwhelming experiences.
The Promise Of Real Agents Vs. Hype
With so much noise in the market, it can be difficult to tell the difference between a true AI agent and a dressed-up LLM workflow. But with a sharp eye, it's possible. As Yoav Shoham, Stanford professor emeritus and AI21 Labs cofounder, put it in MIT Tech Review, 'We don't necessarily need a rigid standard, but we do need clearer expectations about what these systems are supposed to do, how autonomously they operate, and how reliably they perform.'
Asking just a few key questions can go a long way toward cutting through the hype.
The most important thing to check for is whether the tool can make autonomous decisions without constant human input. A real agent doesn't just wait for you to tell it what to do. It assesses the situation, weighs options, and chooses a course of action based on context. If it simply reacts to pre-set triggers, it's likely just automation. In banking, for example, agents should be able to not only identify suspicious activity; they should take the appropriate safeguarding actions without being prompted.
Additionally, true agents should demonstrate that they're learning and improving over time. They adapt to user behavior, refine their strategies, and adjust based on outcomes. If the system performs the same way no matter how many times it runs, that's your sign you've been snared by a marketing gimmick.
Lastly, Shoham makes the important point that even the smartest agent isn't useful in a vacuum. 'Without a shared vocabulary or context, coordination becomes brittle,' he writes. 'Solving it at scale is far from trivial.' Of course, agents can be taught to negotiate and collaborate, but it won't happen automatically. 'The potential here is real,' he argues. 'But we need to match the ambition with thoughtful design, clear definitions, and realistic expectations.'
Final Thoughts
Agent washing may seem like a harmless bit of marketing. But in reality, it undermines the entire ecosystem by fostering skepticism, slowing adoption, and turning enthusiasm into disappointment.
As sobering as Gartner's findings are, there is also reason for optimism. The firm predicts that at least 15% of day-to-day work decisions will be made autonomously through agentic AI by 2028, up from 0% in 2024. Beyond that, 33% of enterprise software applications will include agentic AI by 2028, up from less than 1% in 2024.
If we want to build a future powered by truly intelligent tools, we have to start with clarity. That means resisting the urge to chase buzzwords and instead focus on solving real problems with real capabilities.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Pension Funds Missing Tech Rally Turn to Completion Portfolios
(Bloomberg) -- Some pension funds are waking up to a harsh reality: they've been left behind by the market's hottest rally. Investors are discovering they're underexposed to names like Nvidia Corp. and Microsoft Corp. — both of which recently hit record highs. The shortfall traces back to active managers, who often sidestep expensive tech stocks in search of other opportunities. Why New York City Has a Fleet of New EVs From a Dead Carmaker Trump Takes Second Swing at Cutting Housing Assistance for Immigrants Chicago Schools Seeks $1 Billion of Short-Term Debt as Cash Gone A London Apartment Tower With Echoes of Victorian Rail and Ancient Rome Now they're shifting course, with the help of so-called 'completion portfolios,' tailored strategies that help plug gaps in exposure. Demand for these vehicles is on the rise, according to asset managers Pacific Investment Management Co., Russell Investments Group, and Australia's Queensland Investment Corp., which together oversee $2.5 trillion and offer the service. 'We have seen a marked increase from our clients adopting new completion portfolio solutions the last 18 months' said Nick Zylkowski, co-head of customized portfolio solutions at Russell Investments. 'Portfolio analytics that measure risk across the entire portfolio are critical to the decision making.' These portfolios are gaining traction as markets become more concentrated, pressuring institutional investors to rethink long-held caution or risk falling further behind. The Magnificent Seven now make up over 30% of the S&P 500 index, up from 10% a decade ago. Surging valuations for the group have powered US stocks in prior years, in turn amplifying the effect of pullbacks like that seen in the past week. The strategy involves pension systems pooling together their various managers' holdings, measuring where the combined portfolio falls short of a benchmark, and then uses a separate sleeve — often derivatives or baskets of stocks — to fill in the missing exposures. The idea is not to chase returns but to cut the risk of drifting too far from the market itself. Melbourne-based Mercer Superannuation Australia Ltd. is one pension that has leaned into the strategy to avoid underperformance in the past fiscal year. 'When we look across the universe of active global equity managers, we find that the overwhelming majority have been materially underweight to these large US technology companies,' said Mercer Chief Investment Officer Graeme Miller, who manages A$74 billion ($48 billion) in assets. LegalSuper, which has A$7 billion in assets, uses completion portfolios to hedge concentrated exposures. Relying on external active managers usually 'means that you're underweight the big mega caps,' said interim CIO Andrew Lill. 'As a result, there's an increasing need to reduce active risk,' through completion portfolios, he said. Still, they're not a cure-all. AustralianSuper, the country's largest pension with A$388 billion under management, uses completion portfolios but still blamed underweight exposure to megacap US tech in externally managed funds for lackluster returns last year. Others avoid them altogether. 'There are some great alpha opportunities out there,' said Mark Rider, chief investment officer of Brighter Super, a A$35 billion fund, according to their website. A completion portfolio would 'override' their contribution, he said. Benchmark Mismatches The strategy is also gaining traction in fixed income. Active bond managers are preferring corporate debt for higher yields, which creates a mismatch against benchmarks, according to Stuart Simmons, head of multi-asset solutions in the Liquid Markets Group for Queensland Investment Corp. As a result, more large investors are using completion portfolios to load up on US Treasuries exposure, Simmons added. Other investors have turned to the portfolios to manage risk across asset classes, aligning exposure to growth proxies in stocks, bonds and commodities, said Sam Watkins, who heads business in Australia and New Zealand at Pimco. 'What has changed is that it was a very narrow subset that we were dealing with in the past, and that now has broadened into a much larger group,' Watkins said, referring to the use of the strategy. (Updates fifth paragraph to show recent pullback in tech stocks. An earlier version corrected the spelling of Stuart Simmons) Foreigners Are Buying US Homes Again While Americans Get Sidelined What Declining Cardboard Box Sales Tell Us About the US Economy Women's Earnings Never Really Recover After They Have Children Survived Bankruptcy. Next Up: Cultural Relevance? Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Beijing turns against Nvidia's AI chip after ‘insulting' Lutnick remarks
Beijing's move to restrict sales of Nvidia's China-specific artificial intelligence processor was prompted by remarks from US commerce Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Short-seller Andrew Left says OpenAI's $500 billion valuation proves Palantir stock is way too expensive
Andrew Left recently revealed a short position in Palantir, citing its huge valuation. Since then, his firm, Citron Research, has reiterated and fleshed out its bearish stance. In a new note, it uses OpenAI's latest valuation to illustrate why it sees Palantir as too pricey. A week after Andrew Left criticized Palantir Technologies as highly overvalued, the short-seller is back with a more detailed analysis. On August 18, Left's investment firm, Citron Research, published a note on Palantir stock, holding it up against another AI titan to illustrate why its high valuation should be alarming to investors. In a Fox Business appearance last week, Left discussed his Palantir short position, stating that the stock wouldn't become cheap until it reached a price range of $40-$50 per share. However, since then, his firm has updated its view. Citron Research said in the note that even if Palantir fell to $40 a share—which would mark a 77% decline from Tuesday's high—it would still be expensive. The firm highlighted OpenAI's plan to sell $6 billion worth of stock to illustrate its view on Palantir. "Its new $500 billion valuation provides a true benchmark for evaluating Wall Street's favorite trading stock, Palantir, a company now detached from fundamentals and analysis, ironically the very services it claims to offer," Citron stated. The firm provided a breakdown of why Palantir would be lucky to reach OpenAI's valuation multiple. It began by dividing Palantir's projected 2026 revenue of roughly $500 billion by OpenAI's roughly $29.6 billion, resulting in a price-to-revenue multiple of 17x. "If Palantir trades at the same 17x price-to-revenue multiple on $5.6 billion in revenue (with approximately 2.37 billion shares outstanding), the implied stock price would be about $40 per share." However, the note went on to say that even if Palantir stock were to fall to that level, it would still be one of the most expensive software as a service (SaaS) stocks in history. Left questioned whether Palantir deserves to be trading at the same multiple as OpenAI, making it clear that he does not think it belongs in the same league as the AI titan. "What's remarkable about OpenAI isn't just its rapid growth, but the unprecedented scale at which it's occurring—unique in tech history," the note said. After reporting strong second-quarter earnings and rising more than 118% year-to-date, Palantir stock has declined over the past week. Shares continued to slide on Tuesday, down about 6% to $163.92 at midday. Palantir did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider. Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data