The tool you already pay for might already capture agent activity, or it might not be able to. The only way to know is to check, not assume.
Key Takeaways
- Some workforce monitoring products now have a feature that tracks autonomous agent activity. Others still focus only on human activity.
- Check what your specific tool can do before deciding whether to extend or replace it. Capability in this category has changed quickly.
- Extending and replacing both have real costs. Doing neither leaves blind spots that may not become obvious until they affect a budget review, workflow, or security investigation.
Some Monitoring Tools Can Already See Agents
Historically, employee monitoring tools focused on human activity. That's changing. The ActivTrak platform captures behavioral data across people, tools, and AI agents, and the workflows that connect them. Teramind’s Agentic AI Dashboard detects autonomous agents, tracks their commands, and attributes actions to specific users.
Some tools still focus on human app, site, and screen activity. Larridin's comparison of 7 Tools to Monitor AI Usage at Work shows how much AI-agent coverage can vary from one product to another.
Check Your Current Tool Before You Replace It
Start with four questions:
- Does it have a feature or product line for AI agents or autonomous activity, not just “AI tool usage” by employees?
- Can it distinguish human mouse and keyboard activity from a script or agent executing commands at machine speed?
- Can you filter or segment reporting by agent versus human, or does everything roll up into one activity number?
- Is agent coverage already available, or is it still in early access or on the roadmap?
If the answer to most of these is no, your current tool probably isn't giving you meaningful visibility into agent activity.
Extend, Replace, or Accept the Blind Spots
If your tool does support agent tracking, find out exactly what that coverage includes. Some features have rolled out in stages, so check what's actually enabled on your account.
Extend: Add an agent-specific module from your current provider or a separate agent-observability tool.
- Pro: Usually less disruptive than replacing your current platform.
- Con: The systems need to reconcile the same users and agents. Otherwise, they can double-count activity or miss handoffs between people and agents working on the same task.
Replace: Move to a platform that measures people and agents together.
- Pro: Avoids having to reconcile human and agent activity across separate systems.
- Con: Requires migration and retraining, and you may lose historical baseline data from your current tool.
Do neither: Keep your current setup without adding agent visibility.
- Pro: No immediate implementation or migration work.
- Con: Agent spend can go unnoticed, output can be difficult to attribute, and agents may operate without a clear owner in your dashboards. Those gaps often surface later during a budget review, workflow problem, or security investigation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can employee monitoring software track AI agents?
Some platforms can. Look for a specific agent or autonomous-activity capability rather than assuming that employee AI-usage tracking also covers agents. Confirm whether the tool can distinguish agent activity from human activity and report on each separately.
Do we need to replace our monitoring platform to track AI agents?
Not necessarily. If your current platform offers agent tracking, or you can add it without creating major data and identity gaps, extending the existing stack may make sense. Replacing it may make more sense when agent activity remains invisible or requires multiple systems that are difficult to reconcile.
How Larridin Measures Human and Agent Activity
If your current tools leave gaps in agent visibility, Larridin measures people and agents in one view and attributes human and agent spend together. That reduces the need to reconcile activity and cost data across separate systems.
See how Larridin measures AI usage, agent activity, and spend across the enterprise.