Today's AI, particularly neural networks, stems from a long tradition in cognitive science where psychologists used mathematical models to understand human thought. Key advances in neural nets were made by researchers trying to replicate how human minds work, not just build intelligent machines.

An autonomous agent is a complete software system, not merely a feature of an LLM. Dell's CTO defines it by four key components: an LLM (for reasoning), a knowledge graph (for specialized memory), MCP (for tool use), and A2A protocols (for agent collaboration).

An AI agent uses an LLM with tools, giving it agency to decide its next action. In contrast, a workflow is a predefined, deterministic path where the LLM's actions are forced. Most production AI systems are actually workflows, not true agents.

The path to robust AI applications isn't a single, all-powerful model. It's a system of specialized "sub-agents," each handling a narrow task like context retrieval or debugging. This architecture allows for using smaller, faster, fine-tuned models for each task, improving overall system performance and efficiency.

The true building block of an AI feature is the "agent"—a combination of the model, system prompts, tool descriptions, and feedback loops. Swapping an LLM is not a simple drop-in replacement; it breaks the agent's behavior and requires re-engineering the entire system around it.

The future of AI requires two distinct interaction models. One is the conversational "agent," akin to collaborating with a person. The other is the formally programmed "system." These are different paradigms for different needs, like a chair versus a table, not a single evolutionary path.

Early agent development used simple frameworks ("scaffolds") to structure model interactions. As LLMs grew more capable, the industry moved to "harnesses"—more opinionated, "batteries-included" systems that provide default tools (like planning and file systems) and handle complex tasks like context compaction automatically.

The 'agents vs. applications' debate is a false dichotomy. Future applications will be sophisticated, orchestrated systems that embed agentic capabilities. They will feature multiple LLMs, deterministic logic, and robust permission models, representing an evolution of software, not a replacement of it.

The computer industry originally chose a "hyper-literal mathematical machine" path over a "human brain model" based on neural networks, a theory that existed since the 1940s. The current AI wave represents the long-delayed success of that alternate, abandoned path.