Meta has quietly softened its internal push for staff to maximise use of AI tools, updating performance-review guidance this week to drop explicit references to "usage of AI" and labels like "AI Native" in favour of judging employees on overall impact, "supported by AI or other means". The shift follows months of controversy, including a lawsuit from former employees alleging that AI-usage-linked labels contributed to unfair layoffs, and an internal "leaderboard" that ranked staff by AI token consumption, which was taken down after leaking in April. Meta says the changes simply restate its existing approach and denies the legal claims, but employees told WIRED the revised wording removes pressure to use AI when it isn't useful.

Alongside this, Meta is encouraging—though not requiring—staff to trial its new agentic AI tool, Hatch, which can autonomously browse the web and operate other applications, comparable to the "OpenClaw" tool. Some employees remain wary of linking Hatch to personal accounts such as email and calendars, citing privacy concerns and past unease over a now-paused Meta project that tracked keystrokes to train AI systems. Even so, some staff say they have found Hatch useful for personal tasks like booking appointments, while others flag concerns about the environmental and computing costs of heavy token use, which reportedly remains high despite the end of formal "tokenmaxxing" pressure.