This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Artificial Intelligence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofArtificial intelligence on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Artificial IntelligenceWikipedia:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceTemplate:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcomputers,computing, andinformation technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Second this proposal and adding only that in my opinion there is not a great quantity of material worth transposing once the speculative sections are excised.Dznz00 (talk)03:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm rather opposed to a merge. There are many overlapping articles on agents (Intelligent agent,Autonomous agent,Software agent,Rational agent), and yet there wasn't any article that was particularly about recent agents based on generative AI. The articleIntelligent agent seems more centered on the theoretical aspects about ideal agents and architectures. I believe the closest match for the article "Agentic AI" would be the articleAutonomous AI, because the recent trend in "AI agents" is essentially about autonomy, so I may endorse a merge from one to the other, although I'm not sure which direction is best.Alenoach (talk)01:56, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there are a lot of overlapping articles about agents (which could probably stand to be merged themselves eventually, but that's a separate discussion). However, if you haven't already, I recommend reading theIntelligent agent#Alternative definitions and uses section of theIntelligent agent article, which already includes a sub-section on Agentic AI (Disclosure: I wrote a lot of that section starting in January, a month before this article was first published).TotalVibe945 (talk)13:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How did you come to the conclusion that intelligent agents are that narrowly defined? According to the opening paragraph ofIntelligent agent, "an intelligent agent is an entity that perceives its environment, takes actions autonomously to achieve goals, and may improve its performance through machine learning or by acquiring knowledge." That fits the definition you provided of autonomy and adaptation, hence the redundancy.
Forrester Research is a marketing research firm, and the source you cited here (and which is also cited throughout the article),CIO, is owned byInternational Data Group, which is owned byBlackstone Inc., so I doubt that either would pass the bar for a reliable source. Either way, is being labeled by a marketing firm as emerging technology really notable by itself? Technologies fall in and out of theGartner hype cycle all the time.
Speaking of sources, other questionable sources cited in this article appear to be corporate blogspam (SSON, AI World Journal, Positive Psychology, UC Today, Robotics Tomorrow, Healthcare Dive). There are very few news articles or scientific research papers fromWP:RS, which means this article has very few specifics about what AI agents are or what they do, no examples of known AI agents likeAutoGPT orManus, and no critical analysis of how they work or don't work in practice.
All of that said, I would be open to at least two other options:
(1) merging withAutonomous agent, as suggested by @Alenoach, on condition that this article is cleaned up to remove questionable sources.
This is a term readers will be searching for, and it provides the most utility as a standalone article. I added SSON and Positive Psychology for some uncontroversial items, but there are some other sources that were added to the original article, which I'm not policing. If there's info that you think is incorrect in my original version, please feel free to discuss and edit if you can reach consensus.STEMinfo (talk)18:33, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that readers are searching for this term. However, they will not be served well by an article with unreliable references. With all due respect, adding references that are questionable, even for statements considered to be uncontroversial, is not responsible editing. I will be flagging this article as such.TotalVibe945 (talk)18:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge I'm the original author. I'm obviously also opposed to a merge. As I understand it, Agentic AI systems exhibit higher autonomy, being capable of setting and pursuing long-term goals, and adapting strategies as needed. In contrast, Intelligent Agents typically follow predefined rules to achieve specific tasks. Another way of looking at it is though the term "intelligent" is often applied, it is in some sense redundant - if the system does not exhibit some form of dynamic, context-sensitive decision-making, it ceases to be an agent in the first place — it becomes a deterministic automation or a static workflow. The defining characteristic, then, is goal-oriented adaptability within a fixed domain, not general-purpose initiative.
By contrast, Agentic AI refers to systems whose autonomy and adaptability extend beyond a single function or task. They are acting across domains with a degree of initiative that suggests open-endedness, not just task completion. Rather than being bound to one functional area, Agentic AI acts more like a cohesive system capable of orchestrating diverse capabilities in pursuit of evolving objectives.
Clarifying to the reader that my comment on June 12 was in response to this one, which wasn't signed at the time. Speaking of which, was this comment (at least the two paragraphs comparing intelligent agents and agentic AI) written by an LLM? It sure looks that way.TotalVibe945 (talk)21:38, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the scope of this topic is becoming increasingly well defined as a subtopic. End of. SeeClaude Code or other. With high percentages of code written by AI nowadays at some places like Google etc, this is actually a vital contemporary article.
I have added this discussion toWP:RFCL earlier today, but I just realized that most of the article has been removed since this discussion started. That makes the option of a merge more attractive. Ideally a merge fromAutonomous AI into this article; or potentially fromIntelligent_agent#Agentic_AI to here.The number of views shows that there is now more interest in this article on "Agentic AI" than for the one on "Intelligent agent" (whose main definition of agent is more old-school and theory-heavy), so I believe we should probably improve this article by merging content into it rather than the contrary.Alenoach (talk)22:47, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support merger in the opposite direction per Alenoach. This article and that section are redundant and agentic AI is the most common term.FaviFake (talk)05:50, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
Question/comment: How are you differentiating between agentic AI and AI agents? Most sources I've seen (with the exception of this pre-print:https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.10468v4) treat them as synonyms, more or less. If you know of a better source that treats them differently, I'm all ears.TotalVibe945 (talk)15:50, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We already have an article,intelligent agent, that is about AI agents. I can't say how the two can be reconciled, perhaps a full-article merger is in order, but moving this page to a near-duplicate name is not really going to help, just create even more of an overlap.ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ)00:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like merging the articles is probably a good idea, but if we don't do that then this page should be renamed. My only issue with merging the pages is that when people talk about 'AI agents' people usually mean specifically agents running onLarge language models, where "intelligent agent" can be anything, although this is more a comment on the mess that is AI marketing.CrushedAsian255 (talk)07:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a merge toIntelligent agent in principle. Most of the content was originally there, and merging the two pages in that direction was what I originally intended in the previous merge proposal. I agree with your point regarding how AI agents now have a very specific meaning. I would hesitate to re-merge for two other reasons. Both articles are fairly long, so it may be easier for readers to follow the topic of AI agents as a separate article rather than as a combined one. On the other hand, the other reason is that the articles about agents in general in my view are redundant (this article,Intelligent agent,Autonomous agent, etc.), so there should be a discussion on how to handle them more broadly.TotalVibe945 (talk)14:22, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Y Merge completed by TotalVibe945.FaviFake (talk)10:15, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
