Google’s Auto Browse: AI Takes the Wheel in Your Browser—But Should You Let It?

When I finally got my hands on Google’s Auto Browse feature, I wasn’t just curious—I was ready to put it through the wringer. Google suggested a handful of digital chores as starting points, but I wanted to test something real, something that mattered in my actual life. So I decided to see if this AI could handle booking tickets to the San Francisco Symphony for a night out. Simple enough, right? Well, not quite.

Before diving in, it’s worth noting that interacting with generative AI tools demands a healthy dose of skepticism—and maybe even a dash of paranoia. Google itself embeds a disclaimer directly into its Gemini chatbot, reminding users that mistakes happen. But with Auto Browse, the warning is even more explicit: “Use Gemini carefully and take control if needed,” reads the persistent text that appears in the sidebar every time the tool is active. “You are responsible for Gemini’s actions during tasks.”

That last part is key. You’re on the hook for whatever this AI does, which means you’d better keep a close eye on it.

And then there are the security risks. Generative AI tools are increasingly vulnerable to prompt injection attacks—malicious attempts to hijack the bot’s behavior through cleverly crafted website content. While Google’s Auto Browse hasn’t been fully vetted by independent researchers, the potential vulnerabilities appear to mirror those found in other AI tools that take control of your computer. In short: handing over the reins to an AI agent isn’t without its dangers.

If that’s not enough to make you sweat, consider this: Auto Browse can make purchases on your behalf. Google has built in some safeguards, flagging sensitive actions like buying items or posting on social media as requiring your explicit approval before proceeding. But even with those guardrails, I found myself anxious. What if the bot went rogue with my credit card? What if it exposed my financial information? The thought of an AI spending my money—even with safeguards—was enough to make my palms clammy.

Still, I pressed on. My first real-world test was booking two tickets to the San Francisco Symphony that very evening. I didn’t want the priciest orchestra seats, but I also wasn’t looking for the bargain basement. My only requirement: the seats had to be next to an aisle.

Here’s the prompt I fed into Gemini:

I want to book two tickets to the SF symphony tonight. I don’t want to pay for orchestra seating, but the tickets don’t need to be the cheapest ones available. Please pick the two seats next to an aisle.

What followed was surreal. Watching Google’s AI agent navigate the web in real time felt like peering over the shoulder of a very fast, very literal-minded assistant. First, the bot used Gemini 3—Google’s latest model—to strategize in the sidebar text box. It mapped out its goals, almost like a reasoning model talking itself through the steps before acting. Then the clicking began.

Every action the bot took was logged, giving me a play-by-play of its progress. Auto Browse’s ability to handle multistep tasks without getting sidetracked was noticeably superior to other AI agent tools I’d tested in the past. It navigated to the correct website, selected the right performance, and methodically clicked through various seat sections to assess availability. Everything in the log matched what the bot was actually doing on screen.

After a couple of minutes, the bot paused. A notification popped up, prompting me to take over and press the “Order Now” button. At first glance, it seemed like Auto Browse had delivered exactly what I’d asked for—and in record time.

But here’s the catch: if I had blindly trusted the AI and ordered those two seats for my evening at the symphony, I might have ended up sleeping on the couch. Why? Because the seats it picked, while technically aisle-adjacent, were in a section that would have made for a truly miserable concert experience. The AI had followed my instructions to the letter, but it lacked the human judgment to know that sometimes, the letter of the law isn’t enough.

This is the paradox of AI agents like Auto Browse. They’re powerful, efficient, and surprisingly capable—but they’re not infallible. They can’t read between the lines or understand the nuances of your preferences. They’ll do exactly what you ask, but they won’t necessarily do what you mean.

So, should you let Google’s Auto Browse take the wheel in your browser? The answer, as with most things in tech, is: it depends. If you’re comfortable with the risks, willing to supervise closely, and prepared to intervene when necessary, it can be a game-changer for automating tedious online tasks. But if you’re hoping for a set-it-and-forget-it solution, you might want to think twice.

After all, when it comes to AI, the most important tool in your arsenal isn’t the bot—it’s your own judgment.

Tags: Google Auto Browse, Gemini AI, AI automation, generative AI, prompt injection, cybersecurity, online shopping, browser automation, AI agents, San Francisco Symphony, digital assistants, tech innovation, AI risks, credit card security, AI reasoning models

Viral phrases: “AI takes the wheel in your browser,” “watching Google’s AI agent click around,” “sleeping on the couch thanks to AI,” “the paradox of AI agents,” “set-it-and-forget-it solution,” “the most important tool is your judgment,” “AI spending your money,” “the letter of the law isn’t enough,” “game-changer for automating tedious tasks,” “peer over the shoulder of a very fast, very literal-minded assistant”

,