It starts small, and it starts for a good reason. Someone is tired of rewriting the same customer email, so they keep a prompt. Someone else wires a helper to a spreadsheet because the official report is late. Six months later the company has a pile of agents, most of them known only to the person who made them, a few of them talking to customers.
IT is right to count them and to shut off the ones with leftover access. Counting is not the same as making the remaining ones fit to use.
a tool people trust and a tool that is safe are different
The dangerous agent is not always the unofficial one. It is the one people have started to rely on that cannot explain itself. No owner. No description of the job. No behavior when it is wrong, other than a paragraph that sounds sure. People use it because the alternative is slower, and they stop checking because checking takes the time the tool was meant to save.
That is a design failure wearing an IT costume.
A complete list of confusing tools is still a list of confusing tools.
one agent, then a standard
Pick one unofficial agent people already trust. Write its job. Note where it sits in the real sequence of clicks, not the org chart. Decide what a person does when it is wrong. Then take that to whoever owns the catalog and make it the rule: we do not add an agent until it has a job, an owner, and a failure plan.
Keep fewer of them. The count is IT's job. Whether a person can rely on the thing is yours. If you have a designer, this is the work. If you do not, it is still the work.