A Comprehensive Review of AI Agents: Transforming Possibilities in Technology and Beyond
Qu et al. · 2025
Topics: agents · survey
Read the paper (opens in a new tab)A broad survey, written with newcomers in mind, of how AI agents have evolved from rule-based programs to LLM-driven systems that perceive, plan and act. It maps the core architecture, where agents are being applied, and what's still unsolved.
The problem
Agent research is moving fast and spans RL, LLMs, cognitive science and multi-agent systems. Existing reviews tend to assume prior knowledge, so there are few simple frameworks for someone entering the field.
Approach
- A systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines: Google Scholar searches, screening by title and abstract, then full-text review.
- Excluded papers without full-text access, papers only tangential to agents, and non-English work.
- Organized the results into architecture, applications across six domains, design directions, and a step-by-step guide for new researchers.
Findings
- A modern agent comes down to four parts: memory (short-term context plus long-term storage), tools (search, code interpreters, calculators), planning (chain-of-thought, reflection, breaking goals into subgoals) and actions.
- Self-improvement methods like Reflexion, which learns from verbal self-feedback, and Chain of Hindsight, which trains on past outputs paired with feedback, let agents improve without heavy fine-tuning.
- Agents are already used in healthcare (diagnostic support, patient chatbots), business (customer service, supply chains, fraud detection, trading), education (co-learners, mentor agents), science (automated labs, "AI Scientist"), public services, and games.
- Promising design directions are hybrid symbolic-plus-neural architectures, for interpretability and generalization, and hierarchical, modular designs that break big tasks into specialized sub-modules that are easier to debug.
- For newcomers: build the theory first (RL, planning, multi-agent coordination), pick projects with measurable outcomes, practice in simulators like CARLA and PettingZoo, and reproduce published results.
Limitations
- Open challenges: robustness under distribution shift and adversarial inputs, opaque decision-making, bias and accountability, poor transfer to new tasks, and high compute and energy cost.
- Autonomy makes responsibility harder to pin down than with a plain LLM, because an agent's behavior keeps changing and it acts directly on people and systems.
- As a survey it summarizes others' results instead of running its own experiments, and the search was limited to open-access English papers.
A summary of what the paper itself reports. Read the original for the full argument.