Agent Classification for Enhanced Organization & Filtering

ryan_brown · 2025-07-31T18:42:57+00:00

There was an error rendering this rich post.

Hey Team,

First off, I want to say how much I’m loving the recent updates, they have been a game changer, keep them coming! The flexibility and scalability the new ecosystem unlocks for building truly dynamic agents are fantastic.

Building on this momentum, I’d like to propose a new feature that would make managing and navigating agents even more powerful: Agent Classification.

Specifically, it would be incredibly helpful to have the ability for users or organizations to assign a classification to agents, for example, through:

A simple dropdown menu in the agent creation or settings panel, with classifications defined in the Admin Console (e.g., Personal Agent, Verified Company Agent, Automated Company Agent, etc.). Alternatively, even just a metadata field under Manage → Settings, allowing us to tag and later filter agents based on these labels, would provide huge value.

This enhancement would make it far easier to organize large sets of agents, filter effectively, and build confidence for end-users when selecting which agent to interact with.

It’s a small addition with a big impact on usability and discoverability within the ecosystem.

Thanks again for all the innovation you’re driving here. I’m excited to see how the agent framework continues to evolve, and this feels like a natural next step to make it even more intuitive and scalable.

Respectfully,
Ryan

Find more posts tagged with

Active

Glean Agent

Feedback and Ideas

Status: Active

Comments

michellep

Came here to suggest the same thing! This would be incredibly useful to help organize and surface the best agents for each user segment/use case/department. The classification approach would be preferred. Alternatively, allow us to "verify" agents like we can verify individual articles/assets in Glean. TY!

michellep

@ryan_brown , until this feature is available… how are you approaching agent organization currently? a specific naming convention? a Collection? Those are the ideas we've had so far, but curious if you have any other ideas to share. Thanks for posting.

ryan_brown

@michellep - Currently, this process is managed manually, albeit in a somewhat cumbersome way. If someone wishes to share an agent with the entire company, they submit an internal ticket to our team. We then review the agent to ensure it meets established standards, conduct testing, and perform any necessary validation. Once approved, we append either “(Verified)” or “(Beta)” to the agent’s name, depending on its readiness, and make it available to the broader audience.

It’s important to note that if a user has created a schedule for an agent and that agent is later modified (including changes to its name), the schedule will be disabled until the user re-establishes it. While I personally find this behavior beneficial, it could benefit from further refinement.

Respectfully,
Ryan

michellep

@ryan_brown thanks for sharing your method here. Can you elaborate what you mean by schedule here? Do you mean a schedule of planned iterations for the agent design? Or perhaps some sort of automated scheduling feature i'm not aware of? TIA.

ryan_brown

There is currently a beta feature that we are testing that allows you to add a "Schedule" trigger to an agent, which in turns allows users to create a schedule to run the agent unattended. As you can imagine, this is absolutely huge. Running agents autonomously to help us do the heaving lifting is what we simply can't wait for!

Like I mentioned before, there are still some tweaks and refinements they need to implement before it's polished enough for users, but it's definitely awesome.

Getting Started

Events

Help Center

glean.com