Some communication is intended to inform, some is intended to persuade... And often, the speaker doesn't even really know which they are dealing with.
The best way to get people to interact with you a certain way is to reward them for interacting with you that way, and you likely don't. Not because that's a failure of you but it's just how people (all of us) act.
The world isn't a co-operative multi-tasking OS. We're more like the human body: a multi-agent conglomerate whose component organisms communicate via signals that are filtered and processed. Sometimes a pathogen mimics signals well enough. Other times we detect it. But the system wouldn't work if every participant trusted the counterparty.
Ability to interpret/summarize is limited by context size and time.
Document dumping is the social DoS.
So now you have 2 machines talking to each other in text-to-speech English over audio, then having to do speech-to-text on each others audio streams, and then natural language processing to understand the message etc.
When all we needed instead was a simple API endpoint over the internet for the business where a machine could talk to the other machine with just a few bytes of information to convey the same information and process the same transaction.
Instead we are wasting bandwidth and tons of cpu cycles and electricity making the machines emulate a human analog conversation.
Maybe in the not so distant future, the AI agents can have a shibboleth which cuts the human gobbledygook short, and reverts to speaking in dialup tones.
For example right now we have AIs writing CVs and cover letters that are read by AIs, we're "optimizing" things that shouldn't exist anymore but we're too deep in the cycle to even notice it