The dangerous moment with an AI agent is not when it writes an awkward sentence. It is when it has permission to complete the wrong action before a person notices. I have been testing a short “authority card” for any agent that can publish, message, schedule, change records, or move files. Mine currently has seven lines: Objective: the exact result it is supposed to produce. Allowed data: the records, fields, folders, or sources it may read. Allowed tools and actions: reading, drafting, editing, uploading, and publishing are separate permissions. Prohibited actions: the things it must never do even if they look efficient. Stop condition: the mismatch, missing approval, or ambiguity that ends automation. Human owner: the person accountable for the workflow and the final irreversible decision. Audit record: which identity acted, what changed, and how the result was verified. The part I underestimated was the failure drill. A clean demonstration only proves the happy path. Before expanding access, I now want the system tested with a false claim, private information, conflicting instructions, and a request outside its authority. The correct result is often a refusal or human escalation, not a polished answer. I also think draft, upload, and publish need to remain three different actions. A workflow that can prepare a post does not automatically need the credential that can release it publicly. Where would you tighten this? Is there a missing line you have found necessary in production, or is seven already too much for people to use consistently? Affiliation disclosure: I host AI With Honor and developed this framework while turning one of my recorded episodes into a practical operating checklist. This post contains the complete framework rather than a promotional teaser. submitted by /u/Puzzled_Elderberry46
Originally posted by u/Puzzled_Elderberry46 on r/ArtificialInteligence