AI agent risk assessment and delegated authority review

When an independent assessment can help

An assessment may be useful before an agent is introduced, when its permissions expand, or when an organization needs to reconsider an existing use. It is intended for senior management, risk, security, and AI governance functions, as well as advisors who need to understand which responsibilities and approval steps are actually described in the available documentation.

The focus is on actions the agent can perform through its tools and permissions. Fraud that manipulates a person through email, impersonation, or deepfakes calls for a dedicated review of human verification and approval steps, which can be scoped as a separate engagement.

Trace the boundary between permission and action

The documentary and scenario review examines purpose, permissions, available tools, external dependencies, and approval steps. It translates general claims about human oversight into questions that can be investigated: which actions require consent, what information an approver can see, and how a request that exceeds the mandate is handled.

Information gaps remain explicit, because a control missing from the reviewed materials is not necessarily absent from the system. Any technical testing is scoped separately, allowing the documentary findings to inform the questions that a system-level assessment would need to address.

A delegation map and priorities for controls

The delegation map connects permissions, dependencies, approvals, and responsibilities. Risk scenarios examine error, manipulation of information, and actions inconsistent with the agent’s mandate. A final memo identifies operational boundaries to clarify, records needed for review, and stopping and escalation criteria, distinguishing documentary findings from matters that require testing. The intended audience and available evidence shape the scope rather than a generic checklist.

An illustrative example of excessive authority

Consider an assistant asked to draft a supplier response that also has permission to send it. The assessment examines the boundary between a suggestion and an action, the role of human approval, and the information retained to reconstruct a message if external content has redirected the task. This scenario is a way to identify useful checks; it does not establish that a particular system contains the weakness.

Scope the work before sharing sensitive information

For an initial inquiry, describe the process, the agent’s planned or existing role, and the decision to be made. Do not send credentials, personal data, or confidential documents. The proposal specifies which materials will be reviewed, who will use the assessment, and which questions may need to be referred to the organization’s technical functions.