AI agents are no longer a research curiosity — they’re showing up in production systems, enterprise workflows, and weekend side projects alike. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: most agent projects fail not because the underlying model is bad, but because of engineering mistakes that are entirely avoidable.
After studying hundreds of agent deployments, the same pitfalls keep appearing. This post catalogues the ten most costly ones — and more importantly, how to fix them so your agent actually ships and works reliably.
1. Planning – Skipping the “Do You Even Need an Agent?” Question
The main mistake in the field. Developers get excited about agents and immediately start wiring up tool-calling loops, memory stores, and multi-agent orchestration — for a task that a single, well-crafted prompt could handle in 200ms. Agents introduce latency, cost, complexity, and failure modes. Don’t reach for them by default.
The Fix
Start with the simplest possible solution: a single LLM call. Upgrade to a chain, then to a ReAct loop, then to a full agent — only when you hit a wall you genuinely can’t climb. Ask: does this task require dynamic decision-making, multiple tool calls, or state that evolves across steps? If not, you don’t need an agent.
2. Architecture – Designing Tools That Are Too Granular (or Too Broad)
Tool design is the most underestimated skill in agent engineering. If your tools are too narrow — get_user_first_name, get_user_last_name, get_user_email — the agent wastes tokens and turns making trivial lookups. If they’re too broad — do_everything_with_database — the model has no idea what it can actually do and will hallucinate usage. Poorly shaped tools are the single biggest source of agent loops and failures.
The Fix
Design tools around user intentions, not database columns. A tool should map to a coherent action a human would want to accomplish. Write clear, precise descriptions — the model reads your docstrings the way a developer reads an API contract. Include what the tool does, what it returns, and when NOT to use it.
# ❌ Too granular — forces unnecessary multi-turn
get_user_first_name(user_id)
get_user_last_name(user_id)
# ✅ Task-aligned — one call, full context
get_user_profile(user_id) → {name, email, role, preferences}
3. Prompting – Writing Vague System Prompts
Many teams copy a generic system prompt from a tutorial, tweak two lines, and call it done. The result is an agent that’s confused about its role, scope, and failure behaviour. An agent without a sharp system prompt behaves like a contractor with no brief — they’ll do something, just not necessarily what you wanted.
The Fix
Your system prompt should define: who the agent is, what it is responsible for, what it must never do, how it should handle ambiguity, and how it should respond when it can’t complete a task. Treat it like writing a job description, not a suggestion. Version-control it like source code.
4. Memory & Context – Ignoring Context Window Management
As agents run multi-step tasks, they accumulate conversation history, tool call results, and observations. Left unchecked, this balloons into a context window crisis: either you hit token limits and the agent crashes, or you blindly truncate and lose critical information mid-task. Neither is acceptable in production.
The Fix
Build a deliberate memory architecture from day one. Use short-term context (current conversation + recent tool results), long-term storage (vector DB or key-value store for retrieved facts), and summarization to compress older steps. Tools like LangChain’s conversation summary buffer or a custom compressor can automate this.
5. Reliability – No Error Handling or Retry Logic
Tools fail. APIs time out. The model occasionally calls a tool with the wrong parameters. Agents that don’t handle these cases gracefully will either get stuck in an infinite retry loop, silently return wrong answers, or crash outright. In production, this translates to frustrated users and debugging sessions at 2am.
The Fix
Every tool call should be wrapped with structured error responses the model can understand and reason about, not raw exceptions. Implement exponential backoff for transient failures, hard limits on retry counts, and a graceful fallback message when a task genuinely can’t be completed. Give the model information, not silence.
# ✅ Return structured error the agent can reason about
return {
“status”: “error”,
“code”: “rate_limit”,
“message”: “API limit reached. Retry after 30s.”,
“retryable”: true
}
6. Safety – Giving Agents Excessive Permissions
An agent that can read files, write to production databases, send emails, and make purchases — with zero guardrails — is a security incident waiting to happen. Prompt injection attacks, model hallucinations, or simple misunderstandings can cause irreversible actions. The AI safety community calls this the “footprint” problem, and it’s real.
The Fix
Apply the principle of least privilege: agents should only have access to what they need for the current task, and nothing more. Use human-in-the-loop confirmation for irreversible actions (delete, send, purchase, deploy). Design tools with read/write tiers and require explicit user approval before state-changing operations.
7. Evaluation – Testing Only the “Happy Path”
Most developers test their agent with a handful of example tasks that work perfectly and ship it. Then users arrive with edge cases, ambiguous requests, missing data, and adversarial inputs — and the agent unravels. The happy path is not a testing strategy; it’s confirmation bias with a demo attached.
The Fix
Build an eval suite that explicitly covers ambiguous inputs, missing required fields, contradictory instructions, tool failures, and tasks the agent should refuse. Use frameworks like LangSmith, PromptFoo, or a simple pytest harness to run regression tests on every system prompt change. If it’s not tested, it will break in production.
8. Observability – Zero Visibility Into Agent Behavior
When something goes wrong with a traditional API, you look at the logs. When something goes wrong with an agent, you stare at a final output with no idea what happened in the 14 reasoning steps and 6 tool calls that produced it. Agents without tracing are black boxes, and black boxes in production are a liability.
The Fix
Instrument your agent with structured tracing from the start. Log every LLM call (input, output, token count, latency), every tool invocation (args, result, duration), and every reasoning step. Tools like LangSmith, Langfuse, Arize, or a simple OpenTelemetry integration give you the visibility to debug fast and improve continuously.
9. Multi-Agent – Adding More Agents Instead of Fixing the Prompt
Multi-agent systems are genuinely powerful — and genuinely seductive. When one agent doesn’t perform well, the tempting fix is to add a “supervisor agent,” a “critic agent,” or a “planner agent” on top of it. In practice, this often adds latency, cost, and new failure modes without addressing the root cause: a weak prompt or a poorly shaped task.
The Fix
Before adding another agent, exhaust single-agent improvements first: refine the system prompt, improve tool descriptions, add few-shot examples, or restructure the task decomposition. Only reach for multi-agent when the problem is genuinely parallelizable or requires distinct specialized roles that conflict in a single context window.
10. Production – Treating the Model as a Fixed Dependency
Teams build and tune their agent against one specific model version, then get blindsided when the provider updates the model, deprecates an endpoint, or introduces behavior changes. Agents are uniquely brittle in this regard because subtle changes in model behavior can cascade into completely different decision paths.
The Fix
Pin model versions in production and run your eval suite before upgrading. Abstract your LLM calls behind a provider interface so you can swap models without rewriting your agent logic. Maintain a comparison benchmark between model versions before any rollout. Treat model upgrades like dependency upgrades — with testing, not faith.
CHECKLIST – Before You Ship Your Agent
- Confirmed an agent is actually the right tool for this task
- Designed task-aligned tools with clear, precise descriptions
- Written a detailed, role-specific system prompt
- Implemented a deliberate memory and context strategy
- Wrapped all tool calls with structured error handling
- Applied least-privilege permissions + human-in-the-loop for risky actions
- Built an eval suite that covers edge cases and failure modes
- Added full tracing and observability across all agent steps
- Validated that complexity really requires multiple agents
- Pinned model versions and have a testing plan for upgrades
At ToolTechSavvy, we dive deep into AI tools, emerging tech, and practical guides that help you build smarter — whether you’re a developer, creator, or curious mind. From the latest AI releases to hands-on tutorials, there’s always something worth reading. Visit ToolTechSavvy
