The term "AGI" is pretty misleading - it kind of implies that there is a binary quality to intelligence, a sharp threshold where AI becomes on-par with human intelligence.

Even humans have a huge range of intellectual capacity, and someone who is good at math may not be good at say, writing a novel. So the idea of "general intelligence" is pretty weak from the outset, and it's certainly not a binary value that you either have or have not.

Most people take "AGI" to mean an AI that can perform all the tasks a human can. I think it's a mistake to judge machine intelligence this way because humans are vastly overfit to their environment - we've evolved in an environment where it's important to recognize a handful of faces, hunt and gather, and very very recently do some light arithmetic in the planting season. This is probably why the majority of humans perform exceedingly well in these specific tasks, and poorly in mathematics and abstract reasoning.

IMO there is no such thing as general intelligence, only cognitive tools and behaviors like induction and deduction.