26/09/2026
One thing I’ve been thinking about a lot lately:
AI agents should increase our capability - not slowly replace our ability to think.
The promise of agents is huge. They can research faster, automate repetitive work, coordinate tasks, summarize information, generate first drafts, monitor systems, and execute workflows at a speed humans simply can’t match.
But there is a risk.
If every problem immediately becomes:
“Ask the agent.”
“Let the agent decide.”
“Let the agent handle it.”
…then we may gain productivity while gradually losing something much more valuable: critical thinking, context, ownership, and judgment.
The real skill in the agentic era won’t just be prompting.
It will be delegation.
Knowing:
* what should be delegated,
* what should stay with the human,
* what context the agent actually needs,
* when the output must be challenged,
* and where human-in-the-loop is non-negotiable.
I see agents more like highly capable members of the workflow.
Give them the heavy lifting.
Give them repetitive ex*****on.
Let them explore options and accelerate the work.
But humans should still understand the problem, question the assumptions, connect the context, and own the final decision.
The goal shouldn’t be:
“How much can AI take over?”
It should be:
“How can AI help the team think better, move faster, and accomplish more without weakening the skills that made the team valuable in the first place?”
The strongest teams won’t be the ones using the most agents.
They’ll be the ones that learn how to delegate intelligently while keeping human judgment at the center.
This thinking is also part of why I built Task Delegate, If you’re also experimenting with AI agents and delegation workflows, take a look at Task Delegate, an open-source skill I built to make delegation to AI agents more structured, efficient, and human-controlled.
npx task-delegate
GitHub: https://lnkd.in/gExXhiEe
I’d genuinely value feedback from people building with Claude, Codex, OpenCode, and other agentic workflows.
