• Move toward using "entity" over "agent" -- This was not an exhaustive effort; just a target of opportunity thing.

I defer to the experts for the language that is most appropriate to our audience here.

But my understanding is that not all entities are agents, at least as the word entity is used in Ixa. We might have the Person entity that serves the role of agent, and then we might have other entities that serve as data sources but that aren't technically agents. A Setting entity might hold geographical data, an $\alpha$ influencing infection hazard, etc.; A Region entity might hold information about region-specific interventions / policy. Right?

But my understanding is that not all entities are agents, at least as the word entity is used in Ixa. We might have the Person entity that serves the role of agent, and then we might have other entities that serve as data sources but that aren't technically agents.

Definitely agree. I've heard people mostly use a "weak" agent definition, which would encompass Person but not Region, and but some are passionate about a "strong" agent definition, which restricts "agent" to a thing that executes some kind of local decision-making. A Person who mindlessly infects and is infected would not qualify under that standard. I like "entity" because it avoids this hair-splitting.