Agent Assurance
The discipline of proving an agent should have done what it did. Monitoring tells you something happened; assurance proves it was allowed, bounded, and correct.
Agent assurance is the layer above monitoring. Monitoring tells you an agent acted. Assurance proves the action was authorized, inside its bounds, and defensible after the fact.
Why it matters
A failure report is useful. But a production organization eventually asks harder questions. What boundary was missing? What policy should change? What proof can we show leadership, security, customers, or a regulator? Visibility alone cannot answer those. Assurance can.
In practice
Every consequential action carries the evidence of its own legitimacy: the principal it ran for, the scope it was granted, the inputs it saw, and the state it changed. You can stand behind any single action without reconstructing it from logs and memory.
Where it shows up in my work
This is the whole thesis of governable-ai.com: the missing trust layer for digital labor. Your agents can act. Assurance is how you prove they should have.