This is the Electti review. Today, AI Agent has become one of the most abused labels in enterprise software, and that inflation is costing companies real money. The core argument is simple and uncomfortable. By 2026, nearly every product with a chat box or an automation function will market itself as an AI agent. That makes the term operationally useless, and for a company making a purchase decision, useless terminology translates directly into the wrong budget allocation, the wrong governance model, and the wrong return expectations. Here is the distinction that actually matters. A chatbot waits for input. An agent pursues a goal. An agent operates without step-by-step instructions, maintains state and context over time, breaks complex objectives into subtasks, uses external tools, APIs, databases, browsers, code execution, and evaluates its own output to self-correct. If any one of those five criteria is missing, you may have a useful product. You do not have an agent. The EU AI office, as reported by PWC Italy, defines AI agents specifically as systems based on generalist models used for tasks requiring multiple decisions and interaction with complex digital environments, explicitly distinguishing them from traditional reactive generative models. The market is not binary. There is a spectrum. Pure chatbots, assistance with tools, intelligent automations, supervised agents, and fully autonomous agents. The problem is that vendors rarely tell you where on that spectrum their product actually sits. If a vendor only shows you a chat demo, they have not shown you agent capabilities, they have shown you an interface. Google Cloud data points to a real gap. Up to 40% of IT companies in Europe have not yet implemented agents to automate complex analytical workflows. That is not a sign of caution. It is a sign that most buyers have not yet separated the marketing from the mechanics. The practical test is five questions. Does it act without you? Does it complete multi-step tasks without intervention? Does it use external tools? Does it preserve operational context between sessions? Does it self-correct? If you cannot get a clear yes to all five, you are not buying an agent. Autonomy also introduces risk. An agent that can write to systems, send communications, or modify data can replicate an error at scale. Governance is not optional. Operational guardrails, human checkpoints for critical actions, a complete audit trail, and segregated environments are the minimum floor, not a bonus feature. The ROI question follows directly. Buying a chatbot and expecting an autonomous analyst is not an AI failure, it is a category error. That's the review.