These days, everyone is again sharing screenshots in the group about stablecoin regulation, reserve audits, and various "de-pegging" warnings.

It makes me even more certain of one thing: even if AI Agents run on-chain all the time, don't expect them to take the blame for failures.
I think what they can mainly do is repetitive tasks, such as splitting orders based on fixed slippage thresholds, checking pool depths periodically, or placing limit orders when a price gap is detected;
but when it comes to "abnormal situations," humans still need to step in: oracle glitches, contract upgrades, liquidity suddenly being drained, bridges getting stuck...
These look like normal fluctuations to the AI, but the result is that it drifts further and further off course.

I once saw a situation where I couldn't understand what was happening but still forced the agent to automatically rebalance, copying parameters from others: maximum slippage 0.8%, timeout 60 seconds.
That day, with on-chain congestion and the pool being withdrawn by market makers, half the trades got stuck, and the rest were filled at worse prices.
Looking back afterward, it was a classic case of "the model is correct, but the environment has changed."
Since then, I set a rule for myself: when rumors are flying, on-chain fees spike, or depth thins out, the agent is only allowed to report, not to act...
If I don't understand it, I just leave it alone—less profit is better than getting caught in a trap.