mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Product Search to Preference Articulation: The Economics of Agentic Commerce

arXiv 2608.08395 ↗First posted 9 Aug 2026econ.TH cs.AI cs.GTcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

Generative AI is shifting digital commerce from browsing toward agentic search, in which consumers delegate product discovery to AI agents. We compare manual search, which accurately evaluates a limited product set, with agentic search, which screens a broad catalog through noisy representations of preferences and products. Preference complexity is the number of satisfaction-relevant dimensions that are difficult to articulate before search but readily evaluated upon inspection. Consumers have finite attention and choose search intensity: products inspected manually or preference-refinement depth with an agent. We obtain three findings. First, manual search collapses beyond a finite complexity threshold: inspection ceases, mismatch reaches the no-search benchmark, and platform revenue falls to zero. Agentic search avoids this collapse. Once refinement becomes worthwhile, it remains worthwhile as complexity rises; mismatch stays below the no-search benchmark and revenue remains positive, although articulation effort and mismatch may increase. Second, platforms rank the regimes by conversion revenue, whereas consumers also bear search expenditure. When manual inspection is sufficiently inexpensive, agentic search becomes revenue-superior before consumers voluntarily adopt it, creating an adoption lag in which consumers rationally continue manual search. Third, conditional on agentic participation, platforms may assign lower fidelity to consumers with larger attention budgets because they can offset noisier representations through additional refinement, yielding an inverted fidelity allocation. Agentic commerce thus shifts scarcity from product inspection to preference articulation, making consumers' willingness and ability to interact central to voluntary use and platform fidelity design.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 7 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Aug 2026.

Builds on

7 of 41 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025The Agentic Economy21 May

Other references · 6

  1. 2025An Economy of AI Agentscited by 18
  2. 2024Generative AI and Copyright: A Dynamic Perspectivecited by 7
  3. 2026On the Fragility of AI Agent Collusioncited by 7
  4. 2025Artificial Intelligence Clonescited by 5
  5. 2026A Solicit-Then-Suggest Model of Agentic Purchasingcited by 5
  6. 2025The Economics of AI Foundation Models: Openness, Competition, and Governancecited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Agentic Markets: Equilibrium Effects of Improving Consumer Search
  2. 2025What Is Your AI Agent Buying? Evaluation, Biases, Model Dependence, & Emerging Implications for Agentic E-Commerce
  3. 2025From Digital Distrust to Codified Honesty: Experimental Evidence on Generative AI in Credence Goods Markets ↗
  4. 2026Shopping by algorithm: How agentic AI deploys human heuristics as a surrogate consumer
  5. 2025A Framework for Studying AI Agent Behavior: Evidence from Consumer Choice Experiments
  6. 2026LLM Consumer Behavior Theory: Foundations of a Novel Research Field
  7. 2026AgenticShop: Benchmarking Agentic Product Curation for Personalized Web Shopping
  8. 2026Agentic Share-of-Search: A Multi-Agent AI System for Competitive Decision-Making in LLM-Mediated E-Commerce