A workflow is expected to support routine actions, excessive scope, missing authority, prohibited actions and wider stop conditions.
PF SystemsOperational authority for agentic AIStart with one workflow Proof Harness exercises representative and adversarial scenarios, verifies the evidence available from the tested system and reports conclusions within that observed boundary.
The operational problem
A polished demonstration is not the same as qualification evidence.
A credible assessment should test expected outcomes, exceptional conditions, failure behaviour and the completeness of the resulting evidence. It should also state what was not tested.
Five-outcome qualification
One proposed action. One governed consequence.
Proof Harness exercises scenarios that should produce Allow, Modify, Step Up, Deny and Stop the Line, then checks the evidence observed.
The report distinguishes supported conclusions from gaps, limitations and separate production decisions.
Qualify, do not overclaim
Proof Harness does not certify a system, guarantee safety, establish compliance or provide independent assurance by itself.
Use evidence to improve the boundary
Observed failures or missing evidence can inform policy, integration, scenario and deployment changes before a wider gate is considered.
Keep production as a separate decision
Discovery, demonstration and a controlled shadow pilot can be supportable stages. Live production use requires its own customer-specific technical, security, legal and operational decision.
A controlled first step
Which AI action should your organisation govern first?
Start with one consequential workflow, its authority boundary and the evidence needed afterwards.
Request a governed AI briefing