Use case
Require review for sensitive actions
Add approval at the moments that matter so key decisions always have accountable sign-off.
Best for
Before
Without guardrails
- Sensitive actions can happen without a second set of eyes
- Approvals are tracked in scattered channels
- Follow-up reviews lack clear context
After
With AgentTrust
- Sensitive requests route to named reviewers
- Every approval decision is captured in one place
- Teams can explain who approved and why
How it helps
Practical outcomes for this workflow
Standardize approvals
Apply the same review path every time.
Avoid missed sign-off
Pause sensitive activity until review is complete.
Keep clear ownership
Assign each approval to a responsible team.
Improve consistency
Reduce ad hoc judgment between departments.
Support compliance checks
Show that required review happened on schedule.
Shorten follow-up time
Find approval history quickly when questions arise.
Proof
Records you can share in follow-up
Record example
action=policy_override
decision=approval_required
recordId=rec_8a90
What this means: Review teams can prove a sensitive request did not move ahead without sign-off.
Record example
action=vendor_access
decision=approved
recordId=rec_9b42
What this means: Leaders can trace who approved access and when it was granted.
Rollout guidance
A simple path to get started
Step 1
Start with one workflow
Step 2
Decide what needs review
Step 3
Limit access by default
Step 4
Use records for follow-up
FAQ
Common questions
Do reviewers need technical training?
No. Reviewers see plain-language context so they can make business decisions quickly.
Can we use existing approval owners?
Yes. Teams usually route to the same groups already responsible for risk decisions.
What if no one responds?
You can set clear handling rules so requests wait safely until a reviewer responds.
Is there proof for audits?
Yes. Every approval outcome is saved with a durable record identifier.