Agent class · Native substrate

Govern your enterprise agent platform.

Your platform already keeps the record. We make it prove things.

Agentforce, Copilot Studio, ServiceNow, Bedrock and Vertex agents already log runs, actions, and outcomes. GOVENANT is a read-only schema mapping over that record — no rebuild, no data leaving your environment — that answers the board question: what are the agents doing, and how do we know?

Agent-agnostic by design

GOVENANT does not govern “Claude agents” or “OpenAI agents.” It governs the evidence trail of autonomous work. Keep the runner (the tool you audit from) separate from the system under audit (your agents):

What runs the audit

ClaudeChatGPTClaude CodeCursorCodexVS CodeWindsurfCline

An AI client you already use reads the open instrument and drives the read-only sweep. This is the runner — not the thing being judged.

What gets audited — incl. enterprise agent platforms

Salesforce AgentforceMicrosoft Copilot StudioServiceNow AI AgentsAmazon Bedrock AgentsGoogle Vertex AIZapier Agents

Any agent system with an observable record of actions and outcomes — whatever built it. The agent never has to "support GOVENANT."

Ground truth: the database + actions + outcomes + duties + gates — the substrate, never the logs’ self-report.

Why govern enterprise agent platforms

No rebuild — a mapping

These platforms already log runs, actions, and outcomes. The integration is a config-driven schema mapping over that record — read-only, no agent redeployment, no data leaving your environment on the free tier.

The board question, answered

“What are the agents doing, and how do we know?” Conformance verdicts, coverage ratios, and an honest miss log — computed from the platform’s own data, reproducible by anyone who re-runs the query.

Honest about its own limits

The capability probe tells you which questions your schema can and cannot answer — no silent under-reporting, no pretending a partial record is a full one. That honesty is the point of the standard.

Where this bites — a real scenario

A 200-agent Salesforce Agentforce rollout across sales and service. Every action logs to Salesforce objects; the org has a governance committee and a quarterly review.

The challenge

The committee reviews policies and slide decks, not the substrate. No one has computed — from the org’s own data — how many agent-owed duties are actually delivered, or whether the failures are being written down rather than smoothed over. The board question has no query behind it.

What the record reveals

A read-only schema mapping over the existing objects runs the sweep in the org itself: coverage ratios, verified-delivery numbers, and an honest miss log — and a capability probe that says plainly which questions the schema can’t yet answer. Governance stops being a deck and becomes a reproducible report.

How it works

The substrate: The platform’s existing run, log, and audit tables — mapped, read-only, to the standard’s shapes.

The path — Native substrate: The platform already produces records that map to the standard — the sweep reads what it already keeps.

  1. Connect read-only credentials to the platform’s data store — the sweep never writes.
  2. Apply (or build) the schema mapping from the platform’s tables to the standard’s shapes.
  3. Run the capability probe: see exactly which parts of the trust battery your record can answer today.
  4. Run the sweep; review conformance verdicts, coverage ratios, and the miss log with your platform owners.
  5. Close the gaps the probe surfaced — usually outcome verification — and re-sweep on a schedule.

The full requirements live in the open standard (CC BY 4.0) — the substrate shapes, the acceptance tests, and the conformance ladder your record is measured against.

What you can claim

Organizations with a real mapping can wear the Built-on GOVENANT badge under its four rules and publish level claims to the registry with probe logs — self-assessed against the open standard, open to challenge. What you may never claim is “certified”: the standard has no certifying authority, and a reproducible public record is stronger than a stamp.

Stacks that build enterprise agent platforms

Per-stack integration patterns for common ways to build enterprise agent platforms — each with its own natural hook into the substrate:

Building it a different way? Browse all integrations — or run the free audit from any MCP-capable tool.

Governing enterprise agent platforms — FAQ

Does any of our data leave our environment?
Not on the free tier — the audit is read-only and aggregate-only, and it runs against your own store. Row data never leaves. Publishing a signed attestation to the registry is a separate, explicit, paid act.
We already have platform dashboards and audit logs. Why this?
Dashboards report activity; the standard tests delivery. The sweep asks whether verified outcomes exist for the work agents owe, whether misses are independently recorded, and whether anyone would notice silence. Those are different questions than throughput, and they are the ones regulators and boards are starting to ask.
Do my agents have to “support” GOVENANT?
No. GOVENANT governs the substrate — the record of what agents did and whether it verifiably delivered — not the agent. If the system of record around your agents can be read, or you can instrument the action boundary, they can be measured, whatever framework, model, or vendor built them.
What is “performed autonomy”?
Agents that look busy — fluent plans, satisfied logs — but don’t verifiably ship. Motion is not delivery. GOVENANT measures verified outcomes against the record, never the logs’ self-report.
What is GOVENANT, and who controls it?
An open standard for provable AI agent governance: three laws, a conformance ladder, and acceptance tests any implementation runs against its own record. Free to all under CC BY 4.0, with a citable companion paper (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21440225), conformance self-assessed and published openly — no certifying authority.

More agent classes

All agent types · All integrations · Run the audit