Assess whether agents must have a human gate for external actions (ac0e0c)

Situation

Drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show put vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors in front of model-deprecation manager in a bank running three models on the same credit file. This AI Governance Layer / Lifecycle and Accountability close is agents must have a human gate from vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors, and the live options are Policy or governance breach, Model defect, Dual failure.

Decision

Model-deprecation manager in a bank running three models on the same credit file must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors after drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show.

Hypotheses to test

• Drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show is noise around an already-controlled Lifecycle and Accountability process in a bank running three models on the same credit file, given vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors.
• Drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show is the event in vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors that forces Policy or governance breach for model-deprecation manager under AI Governance Layer.
• Vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors shows a one-file miss after drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show, not a Lifecycle and Accountability program failure.
• Vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors cannot decide agents must have a human gate yet after drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show; hold is the only AI Governance Layer close a bank running three models on the same credit file can defend.

Analysis required

• Test whether drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show changed routing, logging, or human-in-the-loop on the live agent path.
• Score whether the agent action in vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors was in-policy, out-of-policy, or unlogged.
• Confirm the inventory line still matches the running configuration in a bank running three models on the same credit file.
• For this AI Governance Layer Lifecycle and Accountability file, read vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors against drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show and write the one fact that would move agents must have a human gate for model-deprecation manager.

Recommendation

Do not close agents must have a human gate from a generic AI Governance Layer playbook. Vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors after drift in a protected class the dashboard does not show either supports Policy or governance breach for model-deprecation manager in a bank running three models on the same credit file, supports Model defect, or is incomplete — in which case model-deprecation manager must leave the classification unresolved and name the missing control or provenance fact.

Command returns

• Bottom-line AI Governance Layer option on agents must have a human gate, then the evidence in vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors, then the action for model-deprecation manager
• Hypothesis scorecard against vendor MSA clauses on training, indemnity, and subprocessors: supported / rejected / untestable
• Named option among Policy or governance breach, Model defect, Dual failure and the fact that kills the others
• Owner and next date for model-deprecation manager in a bank running three models on the same credit file