← Back to blog
•7 min read
AI Agents in the Enterprise: What Works, What Doesn't, and What's Next
AI agents are moving from demos to production. Here's what we've learned deploying 50+ agents in real enterprise environments.
AI agents are moving from demos to production. Here's what we've learned deploying 50+ agents in real enterprise environments.
"AI agents" are the new hype cycle. Every demo looks magical: agents booking meetings, writing code, managing projects autonomously.
But most enterprise teams are still asking: "Where do we actually use this?"
At OpenClaw Labs, we've deployed 50+ AI agents in production for teams across Australia and globally. Here's what actually works, what doesn't, and where this is headed.
An AI agent is software that:
This is different from:
Agents sit in the middle: they automate workflows, but with intelligence in the loop.
From 50+ deployments, here are the patterns that work in production:
What they do: Take incoming information (emails, Slack messages, tickets), understand it, route it to the right person, and summarize.
Examples:
Why they work:
Tools we use: OpenClaw, LangChain, custom Python + FastAPI.
What they do: Aggregate data from multiple sources (GitHub, Slack, Notion, Jira), synthesize it, and generate reports or updates.
Examples:
Why they work:
Tools we use: OpenClaw, n8n, custom scripts.
What they do: Generate content (emails, tickets, PRs, docs) based on context, then wait for human approval before sending.
Examples:
Why they work:
Tools we use: OpenClaw, LangChain, GitHub Actions, Slack workflows.
We've also tried agents that failed. Here's what doesn't work in production:
What we tried: "Agent, manage this project. Make all decisions. Don't ask me."
What happened: It made bad calls, misunderstood context, and broke things.
Why it failed: LLMs are not reliable enough for high-stakes, zero-oversight decisions.
What works instead: Human-in-the-loop. Agent drafts, human approves.
What we tried: "Agent, read all our docs and answer any question."
What happened: It hallucinated, gave wrong answers, and eroded trust.
Why it failed: LLMs need guardrails: what they can say, what they can't say, when to escalate.
What works instead: Narrow agents with clear scope ("Only answer questions about X. If unsure, escalate to Y.")
What we tried: "Agent, handle all customer support."
What happened: Customers hated it. Quality dropped. Escalations spiked.
Why it failed: Humans are better at empathy, judgment, and edge cases.
What works instead: Agents assist humans (triage, draft responses, pull context). Humans close the loop.
From 50+ deployments, here's what we've learned:
Don't build a "do everything" agent. Pick one workflow (e.g., "turn meetings into tickets"). Make it bulletproof. Then add more.
Never let an agent send an email, create a ticket, or post publicly without human review. Draft → Review → Execute.
Log every action: what the agent saw, what it decided, what it did. When something breaks, you need to debug.
What happens if the API is down? If the prompt returns garbage? If the human doesn't respond? Build fallbacks.
Track: time saved, adoption rate, error rate. If people stop using it, figure out why.
The problem: After every sprint planning, someone spends 30 minutes creating Jira tickets from meeting notes.
The solution: An OpenClaw agent that:
Human-in-the-loop: A team lead reviews the proposed tickets, edits if needed, and clicks "Create."
Impact: 30 minutes → 3 minutes. Over a month (15 meetings), that's 6.75 hours saved.
Code (simplified):
agent:
name: meeting-to-jira
triggers:
- event: google_drive.file_created
filter: "mimeType contains 'audio'"
actions:
- transcribe:
provider: deepgram
- extract:
prompt: |
Extract action items from this transcript.
For each: title, description, owner, priority.
- create_draft:
target: jira
fields:
project: ENG
issue_type: Task
- post_to_slack:
channel: #sprint-planning
message: "Tickets drafted from meeting. Review here: {link}"
buttons:
- label: "Approve & Create"
action: jira.create_issues
Here's where this is headed (based on what we're building now):
Current agents are stateless (they forget everything after each run). Next-gen agents will remember: what worked, what didn't, user preferences.
Today: each agent works alone. Tomorrow: agents will coordinate (one triages, another researches, another drafts).
Today: agents need manual prompting. Tomorrow: you'll show an agent examples ("here's how I want this done") and it learns.
Healthcare, finance, legal—these need explainability, auditability, and compliance. We're building compliance-first agents.
We've done this 50+ times. We know what works.
We'll run a 4-week pilot:
You get:
Book a 30-min discovery call →
More on OpenClaw:
OpenClaw GitHub →
OpenClaw Docs →
We run hands-on workshops and ship workflow automations for engineering and ops teams.
Book a 30-min discovery call →