Over the past couple of days, I’ve been seeing everyone talk about AI Agents going on-chain, and it does seem convenient. But when it comes to truly letting it run on its own, I’ll still leave a “human fallback” open. For example: with authorization signatures, don’t talk about “one-click custody”—one accidental slip of the hand could grant permissions that run on forever. And for routing/slippage/cross-chain bridges, the Agent can calculate, but when it hits extreme market conditions or liquidity suddenly gets pulled, it can only follow the script—at the end of the day, you’re the one who takes the blame. As for “yield products,” lately RWA and U.S. Treasury bond yields have been put side-by-side with on-chain yield comparisons; instead, I find myself asking: does the Agent actually read and understand specific terms—things like the underlying assets, the liquidation logic, and terms such as suspension of redemption—not just “understand” in a superficial sense, but also take responsibility for them? In plain terms: make the parts that can be automated fully automated, but the key switches (permissions, limits, emergency shutdown) have to remain in human hands. I see “simplicity” as a trap: the smoother the phrase like “fully automated passive income” sounds, the more you should pause.