
Most AI Agents Nobody Needs: The Utility Test
A practical framework for deciding when an autonomous agent actually beats a prompt or a plain feature — and when it's just expensive theater.

A practical framework for deciding when an autonomous agent actually beats a prompt or a plain feature — and when it's just expensive theater.

A practical selection matrix across reasoning, coding, latency, and cost — plus why routing one model per task beats crowning a single winner.

LoRA and lightweight fine-tuning are cheaper than ever, but for most inbox and document tasks, prompting plus retrieval still wins. Here's the decision tree.

Email is a messy, threaded corpus. Good retrieval design — thread chunking, dedup, recency weighting — decides whether AI replies are trustworthy.

Email is the hardest test for an AI agent: ambiguous intent, irreversible actions, and real trust. Here's why most demos quietly avoid it.

Most multimodal benchmarks test isolated perception, not the chained document-to-action tasks agents actually perform. Here's what better evaluation looks like.

Calling AI agents 'digital employees' quietly erodes human accountability. Treat them as orchestrated, audited tools instead — here's how and why.

A diagnostic framework for why agentic workflows degrade over multi-step tasks — context loss, tool errors, and goal drift — plus concrete mitigations.

Reasoning depth should scale with task difficulty. Here's when chain-of-thought helps, when it hurts, and how to spend reasoning tokens wisely.

The clever one-liner prompt is fading. Durable AI work needs specifications: constraints, examples, and acceptance criteria you can reuse.

A decision framework for choosing constrained AI workflows over open-ended agents — and the specific conditions that justify going agentic.

A rigorous time-and-error log of AI in real knowledge work — separating genuine wins from rework and the hidden review tax.
Get started
Claim your address before someone else does — free to start, with an AI-native inbox built in.