How should a store handle returns and refunds for AI agent purchases?
Agent purchases complicate returns because the person requesting the refund may never have clicked buy. Stores need three things: a returns policy that addresses agent-placed orders explicitly, order records that capture the delegation chain, and a dispute process for I did not order this that verifies delegation instead of assuming fraud.
Why agent returns are different
In a normal return, the buyer and the clicker are the same person. With agent purchases, the shopper delegated the buying to software, and the human asking for a refund may genuinely not remember authorizing it, or may be testing whether the store will refund without checking. The return request looks identical in both cases.
The product condition questions are the same as any return, but the authorization question is new. Was this purchase actually delegated? The store's answer has to come from its own records, because the customer cannot reliably reconstruct what their agent did three weeks ago.
Log the delegation chain at order time
For every agent-placed order, record what the agent platform provides: the agent identifier, the delegation token or session reference, the timestamp of the authorization, and the payment method used. This is the evidence that separates a legitimate delegated purchase from an unauthorized one.
Store these records with the order, not in a separate system that gets purged on a different schedule. Delegation disputes surface weeks after purchase, often past the window where session logs survive. If the proof of authorization is gone, the store has no defense against a chargeback that claims the purchase was unauthorized.
Build the dispute process around verification
When a customer says they did not order an item that an agent purchased, the process should verify, not just refund. Check the delegation record: was there a valid authorization for this purchase, within the scope the shopper granted? A yes means the dispute is with the agent platform's authorization UX, not with the store.
That distinction matters for who absorbs the cost. If the delegation was valid, the store treats it as a normal return under its standard policy. If the delegation is missing or invalid, it is an unauthorized transaction and follows the fraud process. One path is customer service; the other is risk management. Mixing them up is expensive.
Write the policy before the first dispute
The returns policy should state plainly how agent-placed orders are handled: same return window, same condition requirements, refunds to the original payment method, and a note that delegation disputes are resolved against the order's authorization records. Publish it now, while disputes are rare.
Be explicit about refunds to virtual or single-use cards, which agents use frequently. State that refunds go to the original payment instrument even if that instrument has expired, and describe what happens then, usually the issuing bank routes it to the underlying account. Customers should not have to ask.
Watch for return fraud patterns
Agent-shaped return fraud is coming: delegated purchases returned for resale value, wardrobing at machine speed, disputes filed as unauthorized when the delegation was valid. The defenses are the same records that resolve honest disputes: delegation logs, device and session fingerprints, and return-rate tracking segmented by agent vs human orders.
Segment the metrics early. If agent-placed orders show a return rate triple the human rate, that is a signal worth investigating before it becomes a policy crisis. The stores that spot the pattern in the data will write the policy; the ones that do not will discover it in the chargeback reports.
Coordinate with the agent platforms
The long-term fix is shared standards: agent platforms providing verifiable delegation receipts that stores can check at return time. Until those exist, stores should ask their agent-platform contacts what delegation evidence is available and build their logging around it.
In the meantime, document the store's own standard and apply it consistently. A written, consistently applied agent-returns policy is both better customer service and a stronger position in any dispute. The stores that treat agent returns as a known category will handle them well. The ones that treat each as a surprise will not.