Executive summary
The AI Agent Release Decision Brief is a browser-local planning tool for one named workflow. It generates a human-readable Markdown brief and a machine-readable JSON record without sending or storing the entered text. The brief does not inspect the system, calculate readiness, approve production, or create a consulting engagement. Use it to prepare an internal review, identify missing evidence, and decide whether a bounded AI Production Readiness discussion is appropriate. Detailed client evidence should remain in a controlled client-owned environment.
Decision relevance: Create a concise record of the workflow, architecture, consequence, human authority, evidence, gaps, current decision state, next action, and material-change triggers.
Build the release-decision brief
Browser-local tool. The entered text is not sent, stored, scored, or placed in the Contact URL. Keep confidential evidence in an approved client-owned system.
Generated record
Complete the required fields to create a local brief.
No readiness score or release recommendation will be generated.
Machine-readable template
AI agent release decision brief schema
{
"schema": "longtermcapabilities-ai-agent-release-decision-brief/v1",
"version": "1.64.0",
"releaseId": "lts-1.64.0-upgrade-safe-rewrites-and-privacy-erasure-integrity",
"fields": [
{
"id": "workflow",
"label": "Named workflow",
"type": "text",
"required": true,
"prompt": "Name one workflow, not an enterprise-wide AI program."
},
{
"id": "affected",
"label": "Users or affected parties",
"type": "textarea",
"required": true,
"prompt": "Who uses the result, receives the effect, or bears the consequence?"
},
{
"id": "decision",
"label": "Decision needed",
"type": "select",
"required": true,
"options": [
"architecture",
"evaluation",
"release",
"security-authority",
"operations-recovery",
"buyer-evidence",
"other"
]
},
{
"id": "architecture",
"label": "Architecture family",
"type": "select",
"required": true,
"options": [
"undetermined",
"deterministic",
"retrieval",
"single-agent",
"multi-agent",
"swarm",
"mixed"
]
},
{
"id": "consequence",
"label": "External effect or consequence",
"type": "textarea",
"required": true,
"prompt": "Describe data, money, records, messages, access, physical effects, or decisions that could change."
},
{
"id": "human_authority",
"label": "Human authority",
"type": "textarea",
"required": true,
"prompt": "Name the role that approves, overrides, appeals, revokes, and accepts residual risk."
},
{
"id": "evidence",
"label": "Evidence available",
"type": "textarea",
"required": false,
"prompt": "List architecture, test cases, traces, incident records, policies, runbooks, or buyer evidence already available."
},
{
"id": "gaps",
"label": "Unresolved gaps",
"type": "textarea",
"required": false,
"prompt": "State unknowns, blockers, conflicts, and evidence that is still missing."
},
{
"id": "release_state",
"label": "Current decision state",
"type": "select",
"required": true,
"options": [
"research",
"pilot",
"conditional-release",
"release",
"hold",
"stop",
"retire"
]
},
{
"id": "next_action",
"label": "Next bounded action",
"type": "textarea",
"required": true,
"prompt": "Describe the smallest next action, owner, evidence output, and review date."
},
{
"id": "change_triggers",
"label": "Material-change triggers",
"type": "textarea",
"required": false,
"prompt": "List model, prompt, retrieval, tool, data, policy, provider, identity, scale, or workflow changes that reopen review."
}
],
"decisionStates": [
"research",
"pilot",
"conditional-release",
"release",
"hold",
"stop",
"retire"
],
"boundary": "Browser-local planning record; no transmission, storage, score, certification, or production approval."
}Use one brief per workflow and decision
Do not combine unrelated agents, use cases, departments, or future concepts. A useful brief has one completion condition, one consequence boundary, and one accountable decision owner.
When one workflow contains materially different authority or data paths, create separate briefs or explicitly split the review boundary.
Keep the content public-safe
Do not enter credentials, private source code, customer records, protected health information, financial account data, classified or export-controlled material, confidential prompts, exploitable implementation details, or sensitive production architecture.
The generated file remains your responsibility. Save it only in an environment appropriate for the content you entered.
Use the result as an intake record, not a verdict
The brief helps a human reviewer see the proposed system and unresolved questions. It does not create a release score or infer that a workflow is safe, compliant, secure, valuable, or ready for production.
Attach actual architecture, evaluation, trace, incident, and approval evidence in a controlled record before making a consequential decision.
Move only generic context into an inquiry
The ‘Discuss this decision’ link carries only the selected architecture family and decision category. It does not place the detailed brief into the URL or send it to LongTermCapabilities.
A visitor must still complete and affirmatively submit the public-safe WordPress inquiry form before any information is stored.
Sources
Sources support the linked statements and terminology. They do not certify a system, establish buyer intent, or convert this research into a formal assurance.
- Artificial Intelligence Risk Management FrameworkNIST · Accessed 2026-08-01
Government framework
- AI Agent Standards InitiativeNIST · Accessed 2026-08-01
Government initiative
- Summary Analysis of Responses to the Request for Information Regarding Security Considerations for AI AgentsNIST · Accessed 2026-08-01
Government technical report
- OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications for 2026OWASP GenAI Security Project · Accessed 2026-08-01
Open security guidance
- Model Context Protocol Specification 2026-07-28Model Context Protocol · Accessed 2026-08-01
Current open technical specification