Your AI agent does research for you, then hands the decision right back. That's not delegation.
You ask the agent to evaluate a supplier. It returns a comparison table with pros, cons, and pricing. Then you read the whole thing, weigh the trade-offs yourself, and make the call. The agent did the research. You did the thinking. That's an intern, not a delegate.
Two rules fix both sides of this.
1. Brief the agent like a colleague who just walked in
Don't say "research this supplier." Pass what you already know, what you've ruled out, what decision the output informs, and the risk level. "We need a backup supplier for component X. Current supplier hits 90% on-time but is single-source risk. This informs whether we dual-source before Q4. The decision is medium-stakes and reversible."
An agent briefed with context returns work you can act on. An agent given a one-liner returns work you have to redo.
2. Force a verdict with a confidence level
Don't accept "here is the information." Require every agent to end with a verdict of PROCEED, PAUSE, or ESCALATE, plus a confidence percentage. "VERDICT is PROCEED at 80% confidence. The pricing gap is within budget tolerance, and the reference checks are strong."
An agent that presents data without committing to a position offloads the decision back to you. That defeats the purpose of delegation. Make the verdict mandatory, and your agent becomes a decision partner, not a research assistant.
Try it on your next delegated task. Write the brief with all four context fields, then add "end with a verdict and confidence level" to the instructions. The difference shows up in the first response.
Alex Prompter (@alex_prompter)
Article
/human in the loop
Stop approving every action your AI takes. Start designing where you sit in the loop.
Approving every action gets you consent fatigue and a rubber-stamp reflex. Designing your checkpoints gets you
— https://nitter.net/alex_prompter/status/2072003526755266744#m