Prove the assurance outcome, not a feature checklist.
A useful design partnership starts with one governed AI system, a known change and evidence that a narrower, defensible reapproval decision is possible. This is an evaluation framework, not an offer of an already-integrated enterprise deployment.
Bounded system scopeConnector support subject to verification
Agree pass criteria and access restrictions before running a customer pilot. No customer-specific integration or data transfer is assumed in advance.
01 / Scope
Which AI system and assurance requirements are we assessing?
Inputs
One representative AI workflow, selected components, relevant controls and authorized project owners.
Evidence of acceptance
Agreed system boundary, accepted baseline inputs, evidence source list and scope exclusions.
02 / Baseline
Can the current approved reference be reconstructed?
Inputs
Versioned configuration, approval context, existing evaluations and evidence references.
Evidence of acceptance
Identifiable approved baseline and reviewer-readable assurance mapping.
03 / Change
What actually changes, and what stays unchanged?
Inputs
One proposed candidate with a known semantic change set.
Evidence of acceptance
Auditable component comparison, affected paths and unmapped uncertainties.
04 / Revalidation
Can we avoid irrelevant reassessment without dropping obligations?
Inputs
Control/evaluation dependencies plus permitted test execution or existing results.
Evidence of acceptance
Reused versus reopened evidence, required tests, unknown coverage and a reviewer decision package.
What the pilot should measure
Change coverage
Count mapped and unmapped semantic changes against the agreed change set.
Evidence retained
Record supported evidence retained without rerunning checks, with the reason and approved scope.
Necessary revalidation
List evaluations and controls that genuinely require new work, compared against full reassessment.
Reviewer clarity
Demonstrate each reopened control has an inspectable cause, evidence reference and next action.
Decision time
Record the actual elapsed time across comparable review steps; do not claim a guaranteed reduction.
Unresolved risk
Explicitly count unknown mappings, stale sources and required manual decisions.
These are proposed measurement categories, not achieved results, guaranteed savings or a fixed pilot duration. Exact baseline, evaluation data and reviewer sign-off are defined jointly.
Optional pilot scope preview
A bounded pilot brief in two choices.
Make the first buyer conversation specific. This runs entirely in your browser; no details are submitted or stored.
Local preview · no submission
01 / Choose the problem
02 / Choose the evaluation owner
Proposed buyer conversation
Change reapproval
Evaluator
Joint engineering + governance
Requested starting inputs
Approved snapshot, candidate diff and control/evidence mapping
Expected discussion outcome
A scoped acceptance contract, evidence permissions, named owners and unresolved questions
Connector availability, product release capability, security and commercial terms require independent confirmation before any real pilot.
Technical diligence before access
Supported release version and connector/API scope
Data and artifact access, retention and privacy expectations
Environment and tenant isolation responsibilities
Identity, reviewer authority and audit expectations
Explicit exclusions, failure/rollback and acceptance owners
Start a qualified pilot conversation.
Bring the agent use case, its current approval process, one representative change and any constraints on evidence handling. We will agree supported capabilities before execution.