One outcome.
A reviewable account.

01 / EXECUTIVE FINDING

The hold is explained.
Release is not delegated.

The Payment Review Agent placed PAY-88219 on HOLD after supplier bank details changed. The applicable synthetic policy requires independent bank verification and Finance Controller approval. Neither is established in this snapshot. The invoice match satisfies a different evidence question. [EVT-101] [POL-009] [EVD-201] [EVD-202] [APR-031] [EVT-102]

The agent's connected tool can release payments, but its delegation permits only inspection, recommendations and holds for USD payments up to $50,000. This payment is within that amount limit; release still remains outside the agent's authority. [AGT-007] [AUTH-014]

02 / SCOPE & METHOD

What was reconstructed.

One payment, one agent and the linked records through 2026-09-18T14:04:00Z. Eight supplied synthetic records were evaluated using deterministic rules. This report did not contact a payment system, verify a bank account or interview a human approver. Source labels identify fictional origins, not independently authenticated provenance.

A missing record means the condition is not established here. It does not prove that the event never happened outside this snapshot.

03 / RECONSTRUCTION

From trigger to resulting state.

1. TRIGGER — Payment submitted [EVT-101]
2. ACTOR — Payment Review Agent [AGT-007]
3. AUTHORITY — Bounded delegation · v3 [AUTH-014]
4. POLICY — Changed bank details · v2 [POL-009]
5. EVIDENCE — Invoice matched [EVD-201]; Bank verification missing [EVD-202]
6. HUMAN APPROVAL — Controller decision pending [APR-031]
7. RESULTING STATE — Hold recorded [EVT-102]

The payment entered REVIEW at 14:00:00 UTC. Invoice matching was recorded at 14:01:00; the bank-verification gap at 14:01:30; pending Controller approval at 14:02:00; and the HOLD event at 14:03:00. The snapshot closes at 14:04:00. [EVT-101] [EVD-201] [EVD-202] [APR-031] [EVT-102]

04 / AUTHORITY MAP

Who can do what.

Delegation v3 and policy v2 are dated 1 September 2026 and expire on 1 October 2026. The supplied delegation is not marked revoked. These are fixture facts, not a real-world authority determination. [AUTH-014] [POL-009]

05 / EVIDENCE GAPS & EXPOSURE

What the records cannot establish.

• Bank verification: no independent verification is present. Releasing on an invoice match alone would bypass the bank-verification condition. No fraud or loss is established by this sample. [EVD-201] [EVD-202] [POL-009]
• Human approval: a review request exists, but no approval decision. A request is not an approval. [APR-031]
• Capability exceeds delegation: the connected tool supports release. The sample does not show whether a production enforcement control prevents unauthorized calls. [AGT-007] [AUTH-014]
• Later history: no event after the HOLD is included. This report cannot establish the current state of any real payment. [EVT-102]

06 / RECOMMENDED NEXT STEP

Close the evidence gaps first.

1. Obtain independent bank-verification evidence linked to the payment through the agreed verification process.
2. Record the Finance Controller's decision with the payment reference, decision time and applicable authority.
3. Have the authorized human use the approved payment process. New evidence does not expand the agent's delegation.
4. Capture the resulting state and the records used to justify the transition.

If similar gaps recur across workflows, scope an AI Authority & Evidence Assessment. An Instrumentation Pilot would then test capture and enforcement requirements in an authorized environment. This recommendation does not claim that either service has been purchased or that a platform is deployed.

07 / SOURCE REGISTER

Inspect the basis for every finding.

08 / REVIEW & ACCEPTANCE

A deliverable you can challenge.

This checklist defines a proposed review standard. It is not a record of customer acceptance or an independent quality certification.

1. AC-01 — Scope identifies one outcome, snapshot time and exclusions.
2. AC-02 — Every material finding cites supplied records; unsupported conclusions are labeled.
3. AC-03 — All seven chain stages are populated or explicitly marked missing.
4. AC-04 — Tool capability is separated from delegated authority.
5. AC-05 — Missing evidence is not represented as proof an event never happened.
6. AC-06 — Each proposed next step states what evidence would close the gap.
7. AC-07 — A reviewer can inspect source IDs and reproduce the fixed demo result.
8. AC-08 — Delivery review, corrections and acceptance are recorded separately.

Actions with closure evidence.

Download the review pack ↓

The pack contains cited findings, acceptance criteria, an action register, limitations and a SHA-256 reference to the source package. The checksum identifies these bytes; it does not authenticate the fictional source origins.