Architecture

Your AI Agent Is a Liability. Prove Me Wrong.

Leif Larsen

Leif Larsen

Leif Larsen is a senior consultant and technology advisor at Novanet, where he helps teams design and build modern, cloud-native solutions on Azure. With over 14 years of experience across software development, architecture, and DevOps, he’s passionate about bridging the gap between technology and the people behind it. Before joining Novanet, Leif worked as a Cloud Solution Architect at Microsoft, supporting organizations on their cloud transformation journeys.

His background spans everything from developing industrial control systems to architecting modern platforms - always with an eye for simplicity, scalability, and great developer experience. Leif speaks about software architecture, developer productivity, and the human side of engineering. He’s deeply interested in how technology, creativity, and well-being intersect — and how we can build systems that not only work well in production, but also make life better for the people building them.

1 / 2

Everyone is building AI agents. Fewer people are asking whether they should. In this session I make the case that autonomous agents are a default architectural mistake: they increase fragility, destroy debuggability, and make failures harder to reason about than the deterministic systems they replace.

I am not anti-agent. I am anti-cargo-cult.

Drawing on a concrete decision framework, I will show you exactly where agents earn their complexity and where they do not. We will work through the operational line between a chatbot and a true agent, three diagnostic questions every team should answer before building, and real examples of where agents fail catastrophically in production.

You will leave with a strong default bias toward simpler architectures, and a clear, defensible test for when breaking that default is actually justified.