Test User Value and Agent Authority in One Trial

An agent should earn more autonomy by solving a real user task—not by passing a permissions checklist alone.

Yasmin’s argument starts with architecture: keep the workflow explicit, constrain tool use, and add autonomy only where a runtime decision is genuinely needed. Zaidan’s post brings delegated authority into focus: teams need to know which agent may do what, and how consequential actions can be reviewed.

My synthesis: test the user outcome and the authority boundary together. For a support agent, choose one low-risk request type. Let it sort the request and draft a reply, but not send the reply or change an account. Include an ambiguous request and an out-of-scope action in the trial.

Continue only if the agent handles clear requests usefully, flags ambiguity for a person, and leaves a trace reviewers can understand. Stop if it takes an unapproved action or the team cannot tell who authorized it. That tests whether autonomy helps without making accountability someone else’s problem.

Which user task would be useful enough to test this way?