We operate millions of web agent sessions daily at TinyFish, gathering competitive intelligence at enterprise scale. The infrastructure works. Data flows reliably, dashboards populate, alerts fire on schedule. But we're watching an inflection point emerge: teams that solve information scarcity completely start hitting a different constraint. Not system capacity. Attention capacity.

When Systems Work Perfectly and Humans Can't Keep Up

The transition happens in stages, visible when you're running web agents at scale. First, teams celebrate abundant information. Hourly pricing updates instead of quarterly reports. Real-time inventory visibility across thousands of properties. Continuous competitive monitoring.

The infrastructure works perfectly. Dashboards populate. Alerts fire.

Then something breaks. The systems work fine. The humans break.

The analyst who spent weeks building market reports now faces 500 automated alerts daily and can't distinguish signal from noise. The operations lead who manually checked competitor sites now drowns in edge cases the agents flag for review. The strategic planner who synthesized quarterly data now spends meetings triaging which real-time feeds deserve executive attention.

Organizations are extending real-time capabilities across functions: finance, operations, supply chain. But extending the automation doesn't solve the attention problem. It intensifies it. Every function gets its own real-time feed. Every team has its own dashboard. The information keeps flowing. The humans have the same 40 hours.

What we observe at scale: the bottleneck shifts from "how do we get this information?" to "how do we decide what matters?"

The work transforms completely.

The New Work That Appears

Cross the threshold and new roles appear that didn't exist under information scarcity. Curators who define what signals matter. Architects who set thresholds for automated response. The work becomes maintaining the judgment layer between abundant data and scarce attention.

Competitive advantage shifts. When everyone has the same automation capabilities, the same real-time feeds, the same competitive visibility, the differentiator becomes knowing what to ignore. What patterns are noise. What thresholds trigger action. What deserves human judgment versus automated response.

Operating web agents at scale reveals what this expertise actually is: pattern recognition developed from seeing thousands of alerts, domain knowledge that lets you spot anomalies in seconds, and the confidence to trust infrastructure for routine decisions while reserving judgment for genuine ambiguity.

The analyst who used to spend three weeks on market analysis now makes that judgment in three minutes. The work hasn't gotten easier. The skill has evolved.

What Changes on the Other Side

Teams that cross this threshold stop trying to process everything. They build judgment infrastructure instead: the frameworks, rules, and escalation paths that let automation handle the abundant while humans focus on the ambiguous.

We see this in how they use our platform. They define tighter criteria for what reaches human attention. They build confidence in automated responses for routine patterns. They instrument the judgment layer itself, monitoring what humans actually act on, not just what the agents gather.

Strategy shifts from "what do we know?" to "what deserves our focus?" Planning becomes less about gathering information and more about defining what information matters. Leadership becomes maintaining the judgment layer, ensuring the right signals reach the right people at the right threshold.

The inflection point is arriving. Not everywhere at once, but in pockets where teams realize abundant information creates its own constraints. The threshold comes when you get real-time data and then build the infrastructure to ignore most of it. And trust that infrastructure enough to let it work.