Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.34748

Babysitting AI Agents: A User-Centered Taxonomy and Study of Agentic Delegation Failures

Shravika Mittal·Sunnie S. Y. Kim·Scott Counts·Jennifer Neville·Debarati Das·Philippe Laban
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Users are increasingly delegating tasks to AI agents, allowing agents to perform long-running, multi-step workflows on their behalf. However, agents may perform these tasks in ways that depart from users' expectations for how they should be carried out, leading to what we call agentic delegation failures. We leverage a large corpus of 163,487 Reddit posts, describing AI agent use, to develop MANDATE: a taxonomy of 23 failure categories organized into seven groups. A follow-up study with 73 AI agent users examined the relationship between prevalence and perceptions of severity and noticeability, finding that failures rated as more severe are considered harder to notice, and that prior experience with a failure is associated with greater noticeability. Finally, we assess the maturity of research on each failure and identify commonly encountered failures that have received little attention (e.g., agents running without making progress). Our findings inform opportunities to make delegation easier for users to oversee and better studied by the research community.

Explore related subjects

cs.HCcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shravika Mittal, Sunnie S. Y. Kim, Scott Counts, Jennifer Neville, Debarati Das, Philippe Laban. 2026-10-26. Babysitting AI Agents: A User-Centered Taxonomy and Study of Agentic Delegation Failures. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.34748

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Rewriting the Self: User Perceptions of AI-Mediated Cognitive Reframing

Individuals are increasingly using AI for psychological support. One specific paradigm, AI-mediated cognitive reframing (AIM-CR), uses AI to automatically reframe users' negative thoughts ("I failed...") into more adaptive perspectives ("I am learning..."). While prior work suggests that AIM-CR tools reduce users' negative emotions, the complexities of AI automatically modifying users' personal narratives remain underexplored. In this work, we investigated these complexities through a mixed-methods study in which 28 participants engaged with an AIM-CR tool that reframed narratives about their stressors. Our findings suggest that participants had mixed perceptions of AIM-CR: although reframing reduced negative emotions for most participants, participants felt less ownership of, and less authenticity in, the reframed narratives. Participants perceived AIM-CR as a validating "mirror," as "another self" that could motivate or alienate them, or as an external social actor. These perceptions shaped therapeutic dynamics. We conclude by discussing design implications for future AIM-CR tools to better preserve user agency in narrative co-construction and more effectively support mental health and well-being.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

The CAPED Framework: Characterizing User Skills in Chart Authoring through the Lens of Tasks and Tools

In this paper, we introduce a new framework for characterizing the user skills required for chart authoring. Despite growing attention to authoring systems, we lack a conceptual framework that characterizes the diverse and multifaceted skills involved and helps identify opportunities for system design and development. Our initial investigation revealed that skill is a complex and elusive concept, and that existing theories on skills from other disciplines are too high-level to capture the importance of tasks and tools in data visualizations. To address this gap, we formulate the CAPED framework that characterizes skill as the ability to create a chart involving five dimensions pertinent to tasks and tools: input data, output chart, paradigm, abstraction, and expression. We demonstrate the framework's descriptive power by highlighting different skills involved in similar authoring situations and identifying the types of knowledge associated with chart authoring. We further present examples illustrating how the framework can be used to identify new research opportunities in supporting users with varying skills.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

Affective and Functional Needs in AI Use: User Patterns and Their Relation to Real-Life Support and Well-Being

Conversational AI systems are increasingly used to fulfill both functional and affective needs, yet how users perceive the AI-adoption effects varies. Existing research tends to treat these two needs as binary categories and to classify users by a single dominant need. However, this approach fails to capture users who engage with AI for both affective and functional purposes simultaneously, leaving it unclear how these needs combine in real-world AI use. To capture the multifaceted nature of users' AI engagement, we developed the AI-Support measurement with 1,090 participants, grounded in social support theory, which evaluates four dimensions of perceived AI support: emotional/esteem, social companionship, informational, and instrumental support. This study provided (1) an AI-Support Scale developed to measure the perceived support types from human-AI interaction, (2) evidence that users might adopt AI with a high level of both functional and affective use, and (3) exploratory indicators of users' real-life social support and well-being, enabling descriptive results aligning with theoretical expectations. Overall, this study highlights the importance of understanding individual differences in AI affordance use, enabling AI systems to be designed in alignment with different user adoption profiles rather than assuming uniform benefits across all users.

cs.HC↗