NewsAgents Take

Not every problem benefits from agentic AI, and commerce is no exception. The real risk is not that agents are being applied selectively, but that liability and accountability frameworks are lagging while experimentation accelerates. A thoughtful ecosystem requires clarity on where agents add value, where they introduce unnecessary complexity, and who is responsible when things go wrong. Sorting out those foundations now is what allows productive building later.

Where agentic AI helps, and where it harms

This Banking Journal piece is a useful counterweight to the prevailing enthusiasm around agentic AI. It argues that agents are not universally additive and that applying them indiscriminately can introduce fragility rather than resilience. In commerce, some verticals benefit from delegation, optimisation, and automation. Others may see little gain and increased risk.

The most important point is not whether agentic AI should be used everywhere. It is whether the industry is being honest about failure modes. Without clear liability frameworks, incentives skew toward speed and visibility rather than responsibility. That dynamic discourages thoughtful deployment and ultimately undermines trust.

https://bankingjournal.aba.com/2025/12/are-we-sleepwalking-into-an-agentic-ai-crisis/

Education and risk-focused discussion at MRC

For those looking to deepen their understanding, the Merchant Risk Council is hosting a virtual AI summit on 27 January. The agenda spans fraud, risk, governance, and emerging agentic use cases, making it a practical resource rather than a hype-driven forum.

The event is free for MRC members and $99 for non-members, and is particularly relevant for teams responsible for balancing innovation with accountability as AI becomes more operational.

https://merchantriskcouncil.org/events/2026/mrc-virtual-summit-ai-2026