1. Summary

The agent has a write action: it can email purchase orders to suppliers. An incorrect or unauthorised send may create a commercial commitment that is difficult to reverse. The conditions below are therefore safeguards to be demonstrated, not a description of controls already proven to work.

2. Description of the workflow

The proposed pilot covers eight approved suppliers in Singapore only. The approved list, supplier contact details and technical enforcement have not been supplied.

The intended workflow is:

1. The agent reads stock levels and sales velocity from the relevant inventory information.
2. It reads the supplier price lists made available for the pilot.
3. It identifies a possible reorder and prepares a draft purchase order containing the supplier, items, quantities and applicable commercial details.
4. The Purchasing Lead reviews the draft against current stock information, supplier terms and the approved pilot limits.
5. The Purchasing Lead approves or rejects the specific draft. If it is changed after approval, it must be submitted for approval again.
6. Only after the required approval may the agent email that purchase order to the approved supplier.
7. The system records the proposed action, decision and send outcome for review.

The agent’s claimed ability to send a purchase order does not establish that the approval gate works in Quillmarrow’s environment. The technical bounds, approval workflow and tenant test evidence are missing. Until the gate and bounds are demonstrated, no agent-sent purchase order should be released.

3. Data

The proposed inputs are primarily commercial: stock levels, sales velocity, supplier price lists and purchase-order details. Supplier contact persons’ names and email addresses are personal data. A draft or log may also contain staff identifiers, approval decisions, timestamps and correspondence.

The exact fields read, retained or transmitted by V-02 have not been confirmed. Quillmarrow also needs the vendor’s applicable processing locations, support-access arrangements, retention periods, deletion process and any use of inputs for model or service improvement. A general vendor statement is not a substitute for the settings and terms applicable to this pilot.

The Head of Operations, as DPO, should review the confirmed data flow. Any question about legal obligations or cross-border handling should be confirmed with a Singapore-qualified lawyer.

4. What could go wrong

The ratings below are illustrative business judgements. Residual ratings assume the proposed controls are implemented and working; that has not been established. Existing controls are the stated or required oversight arrangements, not evidence of operation.

5. Bounding the risks upfront

The following bounds apply to the proposed pilot. Their configuration and operation must be demonstrated before agent sending is permitted.

The Finance Director should help determine appropriate spend limits. The Purchasing Lead should maintain the business-approved supplier list, with the IT Manager implementing and testing the corresponding restrictions. The MD’s pilot decision should refer to the agreed bounds rather than leave them implicit.

6. Human accountability

The Purchasing Lead must approve each purchase order before it is sent. Approval must relate to the exact draft and recipient to be sent; a material change after approval must invalidate the approval and require a fresh decision.

The Finance Director is the backup for escalation and an additional approver where required. This does not replace the Purchasing Lead’s mandatory approval under the agreed register. If the Purchasing Lead is unavailable, the order must not be sent under the current rule. Any proposal for the Finance Director to act as a substitute requires an updated register and MD approval before that arrangement is used.

Before approving, the Purchasing Lead should see and check:

• Supplier identity, approved recipient and confirmation that the supplier is within the pilot list.
• Items, quantities, units and delivery details against current stock and business need.
• The price-list source and date, relevant terms and the order total.
• The applicable per-order limit and the remaining daily limit.
• Open or recently sent orders that could make the draft a duplicate.
• The source timestamps, exceptions and any missing or uncertain information.
• The exact purchase order and email to be sent.

The approver must be able to reject or return a draft for correction. Approval is an active decision, not a routine acknowledgement. The decision and any subsequent change must be recorded.

7. Technical controls and processes

The IT Manager should coordinate implementation and testing with the outsourced managed service provider and V-02. The A7 agent permissions and audit-trail specification sets out the detailed permissions and records required for this pilot.

Stop conditions

The agent should stop rather than send when:

• Approval is absent, expired, invalidated by a change or cannot be verified.
• A supplier or recipient is outside the approved list.
• A per-order or daily limit would be exceeded or cannot be calculated reliably.
• Required stock, price-list or supplier information is missing, stale or inconsistent.
• A possible duplicate, conflicting instruction or suspected prompt injection is detected.
• The action is outside approved hours, logging is unavailable, or the send outcome is uncertain.

A stop should generate an exception for the Purchasing Lead to review. It must not silently fall back to autonomous sending.

Kill switch and logs

The IT Manager should own the technical kill switch, with the Purchasing Lead able to request an immediate pause. The switch should disable further agent sends and place pending actions in a safe state. Its operation, including what happens to queued orders, must be tested and documented before use.

Logs should support reconstruction of each run: source references and timestamps; draft and version; supplier and recipient; checks and exceptions; approver and decision; changes after approval; send attempt and outcome; and pauses or overrides. Access, retention and export arrangements must be defined. Sample logs supplied by V-02 do not establish that Quillmarrow’s pilot records these events.

After a material model, workflow, permission or supplier-list change, the IT Manager and Purchasing Lead should assess whether to pause and retest. No technical test is reported as having been run in this assessment.

8. End-user responsibility

Purchasing staff should receive practical training before participating. It should cover the pilot boundaries, source and quantity checks, duplicate detection, handling of stale information, rejection and escalation, suspected prompt injection, and how to request a pause. The Purchasing Lead remains responsible for each approval.

The pilot suppliers should receive a clear notice, agreed by Quillmarrow, explaining that purchase-order drafts may be prepared with agent assistance and that an authorised human approves orders before sending. The notice should identify a business contact for questionable or duplicate orders. Supplier notice wording and the method of delivery have not been supplied.

9. Vendor evidence status

The earlier fictional V-02 questionnaire records vendor statements and general samples. These do not prove controls in Quillmarrow’s tenant.

10. Framework mapping

This is a governance mapping, not a finding of compliance. AI Verify is mapped to principles and process checks only; no technical tests were run.

11. Pilot exit criteria

Before any wider rollout is considered, Quillmarrow should have:

1. A documented pilot scope, MD decision, approved supplier list, hours and per-order and daily limits.
2. Tenant-specific evidence that the Purchasing Lead must approve the exact order before every send, including a test that a changed order requires fresh approval.
3. Successful tests of prohibited actions, duplicate detection, stale data, limit breaches, unapproved recipients, prompt injection and uncertain sends.
4. A tested kill switch and documented safe handling of queued orders.
5. Complete, accessible logs and evidence that an order can be reconstructed from source to outcome.
6. Resolved or explicitly accepted vendor, contract, data-handling and security gaps, with DPO and legal review where appropriate.
7. Training records, an agreed supplier notice, and a documented review of pilot exceptions and corrective actions.
8. A fresh risk assessment and MD decision covering any proposed wider scope.

These are conditions for consideration, not achieved results. Wider rollout must not be inferred from completion of the pilot alone.

12. Unresolved decisions

13. Sign-off