Everyone has a different definition of "agile." Its always going to be different and one of the key points of _agile_ is that you bend it to fit your own needs.

That said, there are certainly pitfalls to taking some aspects of one methodology without understanding why those methods are the way they are and perhaps whether they rely on some other aspect of the methodology that is skimmed over.

For example, story points. The reason they're made up is because people fixate on man-hours being a literal hour worth of work no matter the man. Instead you use a fuzzy point system that at first is impossible to use as a prediction but is supposed to become more accurate over time. Everyone estimates points differently? Fine. that's why its points and not hours. You make burn down charts and measure your velocity in points as well so as long as the point estimation doesn't fluctuate wildly you can start to get something. Plus, it doesn't even matter if you can predict things. Points are are also just an abstract concept to get people talking about task difficulty in general. "300 points?! Why do you say that? What don't I understand about this task." The main goal is to get relative values, not absolute hours.

That said, a lot of these methods are taken as religion and used as a cudgel every two weeks.