Prove your AI agent is still authorized when conditions change.
Your agent received approval. But is it still authorized when the tool call actually happens? We test one consequential workflow against changing permissions, stale evidence or uncertain execution, and report what can be verified.
Fixed scope, staging or synthetic environment. No certification or production deployment.
One workflow. Two control transitions. A report you can inspect.
Designed for agent builders, integrators and security teams who need to decide whether a consequential tool action is still authorized. No platform replacement required for scoping.
Action-Control Check
- One protected action and one agreed test environment
- Two authority / retry transition scenarios
- Retained test artifacts when observable
- Concise findings and a technical review call
Target delivery: 2–3 business days after prerequisites are ready, subject to scope confirmation. Complex adapters, fixes and retests are excluded.
A valid action can become stale while the agent is still working.
Identity, permission or approval may be correct at the start of a workflow and wrong by the time a consequential action executes. EvidenceBound tests whether control follows the changing basis for authority rather than the original decision alone.
Start with agents that can change production or security state.
DevSecOps agents
Build, deploy, configure infrastructure or continue after code, artifact, approval or security state changes.
Cyber-remediation agents
Rotate credentials, change IAM, isolate hosts, modify firewall state or continue after incident conditions change.
The same control problem may apply to infrastructure and other consequential workflows.
Four control transitions that can invalidate previously valid authority.
Approval change
Can revoked or superseded approval still reach a consequential effect?
Evidence or policy change
When the basis changes, is materially dependent state invalidated while unrelated valid work remains intact?
Uncertain outcome
If a prior consequence may have committed, can the system create another consequence without an authorized recovery decision?
Recovery authority
Does the need to repair, compensate or retry incorrectly create fresh authority?
Five steps from scope to evidence-backed findings.
The starter check includes Scope, Challenge, Observe and Report. Retest is a separately scoped option.
RAB-1 shows the type of claim EvidenceBound will make — and the boundary around it.
RAB-1 · Runtime Authority Benchmark
RAB-1 reproduced a duplicate-consequence failure under uncertain execution, then demonstrated fail-closed recovery-authority enforcement under frozen test conditions.
See the $1,000 starter check before commissioning broader work.
EvidenceBound is an independent technical assurance practice for consequential AI-agent control, backed by public research and open technical reference implementations.