Nathaniel Whittemore

But if I could have a dozen capable agents working inside any given software, that software becomes more valuable, not less.

So one argument for why the SaaSpocalypse won't play out exactly as investors have thought is that reducing the friction in agents using tools means that agents will use more tools.

Seat price might go down, but consumption will go up, and there's actually room to make even more money.

The other thing that some are thinking about, though, is that some of the SaaS tools that are used for human coordination today might be naturally positioned for agent coordination tomorrow.

Ivan Burazin, for example, writes, "'Atlassian' is still undervalued.

Everyone thinks Jira and Confluence will get vibe-coded away.

Instead, they'll build headless versions, API first, same product, no UI, for agents.

Agents need standardized project management just like humans do.

Stock is underperforming because people misunderstand what's happening."

Ivan has actually been thinking a lot about this shift to headless software.

In another tweet from back at the end of March, he wrote, agents need headless tools to work efficiently.

Basically, APIs and programmatic access built for autonomous systems.

Headless IDEs, headless terminals, headless everything.

And then just this week he wrote, Most infocompanies are still not solving for what agents will need.

They're not considering the agent as the primary consumer.

They are creating agents that make human lives easier by automating more of our use cases.

In the next two years, agents will completely take over and make comparisons, purchases, and other real-life decisions with consequences.

The alpha will shift to optimizing the agent's life better after you give it the prompt.

HubSpot founder Dharmesh Shah agrees.

He wrote, Every B2B software company is or should be building a headless version of their product, one that can be used by agents.