Agentic Delivery Architecture Checklist
A practical architecture checklist for accountable AI agent workflows: intent, context, authority, tools, evidence, accepted outcome, rollback, substitution, and human responsibility.
The Agentic Delivery Architecture Checklist is a practical checklist for designing agent workflows toward accountable delivery. It turns Deterministic Delivery into architecture questions across intent, context, authority, tools, evidence, accepted outcome, rollback, substitution, and human responsibility.
Why ordinary model/tool governance is insufficient
A workflow graph can show execution order without proving accountability. Architecture needs lifecycle responsibility boundaries, not only agents, tools, prompts, and routing logic.
White paper source context
This playbook is a practical reading of the GAIC white paper's lifecycle-responsibility argument. For this route, the relevant responsibility objects are Intent object, Context boundary, Authority boundary, Evidence chain, Accepted outcome, Substitution record, Dispute object, Remediation closure. RCCS-M and ALCS are used as source vocabulary for governance coverage and lifecycle coherence; this page does not add scores or become legal advice, certification, procurement guidance, or a vendor assessment.
Lifecycle governance checklist
- Intent boundary: state the work objective, active constraints, and out-of-scope conditions.
- Context boundary: separate active context from stale, background, or cross-project context.
- Authority boundary: define who can authorize consequential work and under what scope.
- Tool/action boundary: state which tools and actions are allowed, blocked, or confirmation-gated.
- Evidence chain: define what evidence must survive for review, replay, dispute, and remediation.
- Accepted outcome: define who can accept, reject, or escalate the result.
- Rollback/remediation: define known state, rollback trigger, verification, and closure record.
- Substitution conformance: record model, tool, prompt, runtime, or harness changes as lifecycle events.
- Human responsibility owner: map intent, authority, review, acceptance, dispute, and remediation to accountable roles.
- ALCS / RCCS-M check: ask whether object coverage exists and remains coherent through the lifecycle.
Related Missing Regulatory Objects
RCCS-M / ALCS relevance
RCCS-M asks whether the architecture can express lifecycle responsibility objects. ALCS asks whether those objects remain coherent across intent, authority, evidence, acceptance, dispute, remediation, rollback, substitution, and closure.
Protocol path: MPLP as one option
MPLP can be one protocol path for expressing the checklist as lifecycle records. It is not required, exclusive, certified, regulator-approved, or a procurement recommendation.
Boundary statement
This checklist is an author-analytical architecture guide. It is not legal advice, legal compliance proof, certification, regulator-approved guidance, vendor ranking, or procurement recommendation.