Solutions — sector
Two agents, one ceiling, one record.
Claims is where multi-agent pipelines arrive first and where delegation gets dangerous quietly: an orchestrator hands work to a specialist, the specialist hands work onward, and nobody is tracking what the tree can spend in total.
The delegation problem, made concrete
An orchestrator holds authority for a claim. It delegates to an adjuster, which delegates to a payments step. Each is inside its own bound. The question nobody asks until afterwards is what the tree could spend, and the answer in most systems is: as much as you like, one grant at a time.
- Attenuation is enforced
- A delegated grant cannot exceed its parent on scope, window, budget, conditions or enforcement mode. Not by convention — the API refuses to issue one that does.
- Spend debits every ancestor
- So the root's ceiling is the tree's ceiling, and an exhausted ancestor refuses a child that still has room of its own.
- Revocation reaches down
- Revoking the orchestrator's grant revokes the adjuster's, and whether anything was allowed in between is answered rather than assumed.
Fairness, where the stakes are individual
A screen over declared attributes is not proof of fairness, and a flagged cohort is not proof of discrimination. Both are grounds for a controlled analysis somebody else performs. What the platform will not do is infer a protected attribute in order to produce a chart — a decision carrying no declaration is reported as undisclosed, and a cohort too small to measure is suppressed rather than given a rate it cannot support.