Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI Agents — AI agent app

Gabriele La Malfa, Lakmal Meegahapola, Edyta Bogucka, Jie M. Zhang, Michael Luck, Elizabeth Black, Daniele Quercia/Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI AgentsUnknown

To anticipate socio-technical risks from AI agents, organizations need taxonomies to classify them. However, existing AI risk taxonomies focus on broad risks and do not capture job-specific risks introduced by agents. To address this gap, we make three main contributions. First, we developed a multi-layer framework from a literature review of AI agents. The framework models three core components and their interactions: agents, goals, and environment. Second, we embedded this framework in a structured prompt and applied it to descriptions of 2,078 job tasks from the O*NET database, producing 8,356 risk scenarios labeled by severity and deployment mode (automation or augmentation). We validated these scenarios with 45 workers across 10 job roles and an independent LLM judge, confirming their plausibility and alignment with job tasks. Finally, we extended an existing taxonomy to create a 15-category taxonomy of workplace AI agent risks that covers all our risk scenarios. Our analysis highlights four findings. First, augmentation is not inherently safe because overreliance on agents can gradually erode workers' skills and oversight. Second, Erroneous Agent Actions accounts for the largest share of risk scenarios and has the highest concentration of severe risks. Many arise at the human-agent boundary. Third, automation is associated mainly with organizational risks, while augmentation is associated mainly with risks to workers. Fourth, workers found our taxonomy easier to use for a risk classification task than two other taxonomies and preferred it in 64% of non-tied comparisons with a recent generative AI risk taxonomy. These findings show that workplace AI agent risks do not arise from agents alone; they also depend on how people work with agents and how agents are deployed. Safer workplaces require not only safer agents but also carefully designed human-AI agent collaboration.

agent app

Stars0

Forks0

HF Downloads—30d

Last commit—

Refreshed13d ago

Project healthUnknownNo activity data.

Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.

Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.

AgentHub Score

55 / 100

Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →

Active project

55Score

Growth

40C

Activity

30C

Documentation

70C+

Maturity

45C

Community

42C

Production

58C

GitHub stars · 18 days observed0 not enough history

snapshots

Repository activity · 18 days observedReal snapshots from pushed_at

inactivepushed

2026-08-122026-08-31

Practical assessment

Should you use it?

✓ Best for

Research and experimentation
Prototype development
Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

Active community
Open source
Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

Untested at scale without validation
Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

Review changelog before updating
Verify license for commercial use

Technical details

What's inside

Language—

License—

Sourcearxiv

Open source✗ No

Commercial use—

Docs—

Demo—

PaperarXiv ↗

AgentHub Score

Score 55/100

Below average

Alternatives

OccuReward: LLM-Guided Occupant-Centric Reward Shaping for Demographic Equity in Grid-Interactive Buildings

0 · agent app

Thinking on Shots: Consistent Multi-Shot Video Editing with Agentic Reasoning

0 · agent app

Beyond Execution: Auditing Experimental Fidelity in LLM-Driven Scientific Research

0 · agent app

SysEvolve: An AI-native, safe, autonomous adversarial attack-defense co-evolutionary system

0 · agent app

55 Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——

Indexed by AgentHub crawler13d ago

Monitor for new releasesongoing