I can't help you with the agent, but since you raised commissions, let me see if I can add something to that.
The amount of work, and more importantly the amount of liability, for a Realtor has almost nothing to do with the sale price of a home. Assume 6% commission for the moment. A $100,000 sale brings each Realtor $3,000 (before whatever split they have with their office). A $200,000 sale brings $6,000, and a $400,000 sale brings $12,000. You get the idea. $3,000, $6,000 or $12,000 for the same amount of work and liability. Does that make sense to anyone? (It sure doesn't to me).
What would make more sense? How about a commission rate that's based on the sale price of the home?
Again, just for the sake of argument, 10% on anything under #100,000, 8% on $100-$300,000, 6% on $300-$500,000. amd 4% on anything over $500,000?
To save you the math, using the same home sale prices as above, that yields each agent $5,000 on the $100,000 home, $8,000 on the $200,000 home, and $12,000 on the $400,000 home and, adding one, a $600,000 home also earns $12,000.
And Mr. Seller before you start in with they're all too high, remember three things: 1) No sale = No commission, and 2) the listing agent pays a lot of expenses connected with the sale - advertising, open houses, etc. and 3) he or she assumes the risk that you or the other party will sue over some perceived action of the agent.