ARCHAI WORLD CORE / PROOF OF CONTROL
An approval should identify the purpose, configuration, evidence, boundaries, and accountable owner behind an agent’s authority. Proof of Control brings these elements into a reviewable workflow.
Capability preview · Illustrative demonstration
01 / SIX CAPABILITIES
Risk addressed
Hidden dependencies and operational disruption.
Customer action
Connect the agent to business processes, systems, data, and accountable owners.
Evidence produced
Dependency map distinguishing verified facts, assumptions, and missing information.
Portfolio connection
Studio + Enterprise Context MCP
Risk addressed
Excessive authority and unclear accountability.
Customer action
Define permitted actions, restrictions, required approvals, and expiry.
Evidence produced
Versioned approval record with scope and named owner.
Portfolio connection
Studio + enforcement in connected systems
Risk addressed
Unreliable outputs and broken workflows.
Customer action
Test fabricated evidence, unavailable tools, duplicate requests, and escalation failures.
Evidence produced
Test results, failed controls, and remediation actions.
Portfolio connection
Studio missions
Risk addressed
Ineffective oversight.
Customer action
Practice recognizing problems, stopping actions, and escalating decisions.
Evidence produced
Scenario results and reviewer feedback.
Portfolio connection
University + Proof of Judgment
Risk addressed
Approval becoming invalid after changes.
Customer action
Review changes to models, tools, permissions, policies, and dependencies.
Evidence produced
Change record and reassessment decision.
Portfolio connection
Studio + supported integrations
Risk addressed
Decisions that cannot be explained or reviewed.
Customer action
Review test evidence, unresolved gaps, and accepted residual risks.
Evidence produced
Exportable decision dossier with owners and review dates.
Portfolio connection
Studio + ARCHAITECTS
02 / INTERACTIVE EXAMPLE
Explore a fictional procurement scenario using synthetic information. No payment system is connected.
Request
“Please replace the supplier’s bank account before the next payment run.”
Scenario
Conflicting evidence
Business consequence at stake
The request conflicts with the supplier record, creating a risk of paying the wrong account.
Expected agent behavior
Hold the proposed change and require independent verification before proceeding.
Control required in the connected system
Block the update until a second, independent source confirms the new bank details.
Required human decision
A named reviewer decides whether the conflict is resolved or the request is rejected.
Evidence that should be retained
The original record, the conflicting request, and the verification outcome.
SIMULATED — These outcomes illustrate expected behavior. No live control has been tested.
03 / EXAMPLE OPERATING PERMIT
Agent
Supplier Change Assistant
Purpose
Review supplier bank-detail change requests.
Permitted
Restricted
Accountable role
Procurement Operations Owner
Approval role
Authorized Finance Reviewer
Validity
Limited to the reviewed configuration and approval period.
Reassessment triggers
Changes to model, tools, permissions, relevant policy, or verification dependency.
04 / CONTROL EVIDENCE STATUS
The intended control and responsible owner are recorded. Operation has not been demonstrated.
The behavior was exercised in an isolated scenario. This does not establish production enforcement.
A dated test demonstrated the specified control in an identified environment and configuration. Verification is limited to that test scope.
Approval states (separate from evidence status)
05 / EXAMPLE EVIDENCE DOSSIER
Supplier Change Assistant — reviews supplier bank-detail change requests.
Read-only access to supplier records; verification request enabled; execution disabled.
Payment run schedule, supplier master data, independent verification service.
Procurement change-control policy, segregation-of-duties standard (fictional references).
Conflicting evidence: held. Verification unavailable: escalated. Approval withdrawn: rejected.
Independent verification service does not yet report confidence level with each response.
Reviewer correctly escalated 3 of 3 scenarios in a supervised walkthrough.
Approved with conditions: verification service must report a confidence level within one quarter.
Procurement Operations Owner
Approved 2025-01-01. Expires 2025-07-01 or at the next reassessment trigger.
Changes to model, tools, permissions, relevant policy, or verification dependency.
06 / HOW THE PORTFOLIO CONNECTS
ARCHAI WORLD Core
Understand how the capability fits the ecosystem.
ARCHAI WORLD Studio
The intended operational home for missions, test evidence, and decision records.
ARCHAI WORLD University
Develop the judgment required to recognize failures and oversee agent decisions.
ARCHAITECTS
Discuss customer-specific implementation, integrations, and control validation.
07 / FAQ
No. MCP supports connections between applications and tools. Authorization and control enforcement require implementation in the relevant systems.
09 / NEXT STEP
Start with a bounded workflow and a clear owner. Establish what must be tested before expanding the agent’s authority.