Despite its promise, agentic RAG has its challenges. Hallucination remains a risk, albeit reduced. “Even with the additional tools and feedback loops, we can’t guarantee that the model won’t hallucinate,” Ashoori says. “However, by incorporating mechanisms like confidence thresholds and citation requirements, we’re able to minimize the risk.”
Other potential hurdles are mostly related to the autonomy agentic RAG grants to AI systems. “In traditional RAG workflows, everything happens within a closed system,” Ashoori says. “But with agents, you’re allowing the AI to autonomously interact with external tools and data sources. That raises questions about data security and access control.”
For example, an agent tasked with retrieving information from a database must be restricted to the datasets it is authorized to access. “You also need to control what actions the agent can take,” Ashoori says. “It’s not enough to allow access; you have to specify whether the agent can retrieve, edit or delete data. Otherwise, you risk creating a system that could inadvertently cause harm.”
Explainability is another critical issue. Large language models (LLMs) often produce outputs that are difficult to trace back to their origins. In contrast, agentic RAG offers greater transparency.
"With agents, you can have a chance to observe the behavior of the agent and trace every action,” Ashoori says. “You know whether the information came from a document search, a web search or a database query. This level of observability is crucial for enterprises that need to ensure compliance and accountability.”