I'm ready to accept a definition of "agent" that I think is widely-enough agreed upon to be useful, at least in the AI engineering space: An LLM agent runs tools in a loop to achieve a goal (I've been dismissing the term as hopelessly ambiguous for years) simonwillison.net/2025/Sep/18/...
Post
I tried the "don't call anything agents" thing for a couple of years, but it feels counter-productive at this point - plenty of people are "building agents" now where what they mean is "LLMs achieving goals by running tools in a loop" and I want to be able to have conversations with them about it
0 reposts5 likes
I’m curious how you define agency in such a way to exclude these things. Lacking “the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power” or not being a “thing through which power is exerted or an end is achieved?”
More "the ability to take action or to choose what action to take", but at the human level, where having and using agency is important to living a rewarding life I don't think an AI agent "picking which tool to use" is the same thing, even when it shares both the word and the lose definition