It is argued that governing such agents is a runtime problem -- not a model-alignment problem and not a build-time problem -- and five primitives are derived from the questions that must be answered before an action takes effect and after it has: discovery, identity, governance, attestation, and supply chain.
Abstract
Enterprise deployments of autonomous AI agents inherit a control model built for human users and long-lived services, and the fit fails in three specific ways: agent principals are ephemeral, appearing and vanishing faster than provisioning; their actions are selected by a model rather than programmed, so the set of things they may attempt is not known in advance; and the population is discovered rather than provisioned, because anyone who can call an API can create one. We argue that governing such agents is a runtime problem -- not a model-alignment problem and not a build-time problem -- and we derive five primitives from the questions that must be answered before an action takes effect and after it has: discovery, identity, governance, attestation, and supply chain. For each we state what fails if it is absent and why the others cannot structurally supply it. We describe an implementation in which an agent's action is mediated against policy before it takes effect, authorised against a per-tenant action vocabulary, and recorded in a hash-linked signed ledger a third party can verify with the vendor out of the loop. We report what the architecture costs: the enforcement point sits on the request's critical path, identity requires a sidecar per workload, and fail-closed mediation converts availability incidents into denial. We are explicit about implementation status: four primitives are built and running in private pilots, and the fifth is built as separate tooling and not yet integrated into the request path. We keep it in the set deliberately: a five-part decomposition that exactly matches what its authors happened to build is not a taxonomy but a description of a codebase.
A two-dimensional design space is introduced in which both dimensions are organised into five operational levels, making the coupling explicit and navigable, and six architectural tactics for adjusting a deployment’s position within it are proposed, offering a shared vocabulary for compliance-aware agentic AI design.
D. Safin, Dian Baltaa, Timon Sengewaldb et al.· EGOV-CeDEM-ePart 2026· 0 citations
This is the first paper from POLIS, an ongoing research programme studying algorithmic institutions for multi-agent systems, and asks which parts of an AI institution produce safety and how they do it.
This paper proposes two complementary artifacts: an Agency Justification Record (AJR) helps teams decide when an agent is warranted over simpler alternatives and an Agentic Delegation Policy (ADP) captures what must be specified for safe and effective development.
Chetan Arora, Andreas Vogelsang, Abbishek Sharma· arXiv.org· 0 citations
This paper introduces L-DREA, a deterministic runtime-enforcement architecture that generalizes Anderson’s 1972 reference-monitor primitive from mediation of data access to mediation of externally effective action, and six runtime invariants are established analytically.
Charting these challenges provides a roadmap toward trustworthy autonomous agent deployment: security must become a verifiable property of the architectures, protocols, and runtimes that govern agent behavior, rather than an optional layer of guidance.
This work presents a post-hoc XAI framework that transforms a lengthy agent's execution trace into a structured report and a faithful natural-language explanation explicitly grounded in its observable behavior, outperforming naive LLM-generated explanations.
Vittoria Vineis, Fabiano Veglianti, Lorenzo Antonelli et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.