Workshop: "AI Agents & Web Browsers"

[ruoxiran]

NOTE: This is a tentative workshop draft — Dom and Roy are working on a CFP:

Introduction

This W3C Workshop aims to gather stakeholders to explore how AI agents can interact with and be integrated into Web browsers, and to discuss potential areas for standardization. This workshop focuses on AI Agents within the Web browser. We will discuss how AI agents can operate in or alongside browsers, the impact on Web architecture, and how standards might evolve to support these capabilities.

Possible topics:

1. AI Agents in the Browser

This topic explores the evolving relationship between AI agents and Web browsers.

• How can AI agents be embedded within browsers or interact through extensions and APIs?

• What new interaction paradigms might arise when browsers include or cooperate with AI systems?

• How might AI agents evolve into user agents functioning as AI browsers? (ChatGPT Atlas, Comet, etc,.)?

• What APIs (if any) would be needed to support interaction between web applications and AI agents? What inspiration to draw from ongoing development of LLM/browser interaction APIs

2. Inter-Agent Communication Across the Web

To support collaboration between agents, and between agents and browsers, mechanisms for discovery, communication, and trust negotiation are essential.

• How can agents reliably identify and locate other agents across the Web?

• How can collaboration protocols enable agents to exchange intent, task delegation, capability information, and negotiate roles, to enable agents' automated collaboration on the Web?

• How should authentication, authorization, and encryption be handled in browser-mediated agent interactions?

• What safeguards are needed to preserve privacy, transparency, and content integrity when AI agents act through the browser?

References on this topic:

• AI in the Browser
• Work in W3C AI Agent Protocol CG
• WebMCP
• NLWeb

3. Emerging Use Cases and Requirements for AI Agents and the Web

Real-world use cases are already showing how AI is entering the browser layer, from personalized assistants and summarizers to automation tools and accessibility helpers.

• How are AI agents used in browsers today (e.g., productivity, accessibility, Web search, or content curation)?

• What opportunities do AI browser integrations create for improving user experience?

• What positive and negative impact are these new agents having on content and service production and delivery on the Web?

References on this topic:

• Work in W3C Autonomous Agents on the Web CG
• AI in the Browser Threat Modelling

4. Standardization Gaps and Opportunities

As emerging new consumers and likely producers of Web content and services, AI agents may raise new demands for interoperability with standardized foundations.

• Where existing Web standards already support the development and deployment of AI agents, are there changes in how we produce and review these specifications to ensure a better fit with that ecosystem?

• How can agent frameworks align with or extend ongoing specification efforts？

• Where do current W3C standards fall short in enabling agentic behaviors, and where are new specifications needed?

• What role (if any) should W3C play in standardization communication and coordination of AI Agents and Web browsers?

Possible outcomes:

• Understand how AI Agents may impact the Web and what role W3C should play in this standardization.
• Explore possible standards of AI Agent and Web.
• Identify what updates to existing standards or new specifications are needed.
• Build a roadmap for W3C standardization in the AI Agent space.

Meeting format: hybrid (tentatively)

[cc'ing @dontcallmedom @plehegar ]

[ruoxiran]

#506

[plehegar]

We need to make sure this workshop and the "Smart Agents" workshop are well differentiated.

[egekorkan]

As further references for topic 3 (possibly also 4), I would like to add that the Eclipse LMOS project, which is about building and running multi-agent systems, is already using 2 W3C RECs from the WoT WG, mentioned at https://eclipse.dev/lmos/docs/lmos_protocol/agent_description/ and https://eclipse.dev/lmos/docs/lmos_protocol/discovery/. Additionally, Agent Network Protocol is using DIDs.

[michaelchampion]

W3C definitely needs to collectively assess where LLM-style AI fits in with the web and the threats/opportunities it creates.
BUT It seems far too late for a traditional W3C academic-style workshop; way too many $ and way too much running code out there, so it will draw more sales pitches than early-stage proposals.
Not sure what to suggest, but some set of Team, AB/TAG, and member experts in a "task force" or whatever you want to call it should:
Define some specific questions
Reach out to member and non-member experts AND IMPLEMENTERS to seek a critical mass of people willing to invest time to help W3C answer them
Come up with answers in a timely and pragmatic manner

[dontcallmedom]

Define some specific questions
Reach out to member and non-member experts AND IMPLEMENTERS to seek a critical mass of people willing to invest time to help W3C answer them
Come up with answers in a timely and pragmatic manner

that's more or less what we're trying to achieve with a workshop, starting with this very issue. W3C Workshops don't have to be "academic-style" - I don't think the workshops I have organized over the years were particularly academic in style (with my limited knowledge of what academic workshops look like)

[michaelchampion]

Whatever it's called -- task force, workshop -- I suggest it should be:

• Much more focused than the current draft.
• Accept that there is no likely W3C consensus on whatever it concludes -- some want W3C to standardize the communications among our new robot overlords, some want W3C to be the Serena Butler of the anti-machine resistance.
• Identify the people you need to have in the room to make it successful and do what it takes to get them there.
• And if you can't get the robot-overlord creators to work at W3C on interop or whatever, maybe you should give up on that and try to get the Serena Butler wannabes to participate

[andreiciortea]

The WebAgents CG has recently launched an Interoperability Task Force whose work should help address some of the points.

We are bootstrapping a living report that we will continuously update as the work develops. We have a rough consensus on the report's scope and structure, and we'll start adding content over the next 2-3 weeks.

The report currently aims to clarify:

• what should be the role of the Web in these developments (at a conceptual level)
• what are the relevant standards within and maybe also outside the W3C
• what are the standardization gaps (if any)

Other notes:

• the scope of the report is broader than LLM agents / Agentic AI, but we have a specific focus on this topic
• the CG has good participation from senior researchers who have been advancing some of the relevant topics
• the CG has good industry participation as well, but we'll need to attract more representation still

We are happy to receive your feedback on how to make this effort most useful.

[jyasskin]

Another question a workshop in this space needs to answer is how we can ensure that any AI Agents support the Web. If they only extract value, people will either stop writing websites, or they'll build Markov pits for the Agents to fall into. Note that money isn't the only support that worthwhile websites need.

[plehegar]

Should we add a list of "potential hazard due to use the AI on the Web" to help encourage submissions of problem statements?